Behind The Lodge Door Judaeo-Masonic Theocracy nwo illuminati freemasons

^ ^ ^ i^HH

iBIIIIIluil

lllfM

BEHIND

THE LODGE DOOR

CHURCH, STATE AND
FREEMASONRY IN
AMERICA

Paul A. Fisher

To Ruth and our children
Maureen Elizabeth
Kathleen Ruth
Sean Paul
Ann Regina
Margaret Veronica
Megan Marie
Matthew O'Mara
Patricia Siobhan
Terrence Jerome

4

CONTENTS

AMAZING DISCOVERY

Court's Dramatic Reversal On Traditional Religion * Bias On The
Bench * Justice Frankfurter's Religious Biases * Unitarian Influence
* More Cause For Concern: Freemasonry * Discovering Masonry's
Secrets

PART 1: UNDERSTANDING THE CONFLICT

1. Lifting The Veil

What Mussolini Found * Church Exposes Masonry In 1738 * Barruel's
And Robison's Revelations * Freemasonry In Early America *
Legislatures Investigate CJ.S. Masonry * Other Early Activities Of
Masonry

2. The Mind Of Masoniy

The View From The Lodge * Pike's Morals And Dogma * Albert Pike

* Other Integral Characteristics Of Masonry: Prejudice * Atheism *
Teacher Of The World's Children

PART II: TARGET-THE CHURCH

3. Warring On The Church--!

Insult, Abuse And Violence * The War Against Catholicism Intensifies

* Know-Nothing Power * Humanum Genus Exposes Masonry *
Masonic Influence On APA * Sectarian Means "Non-Protestant"

4. The Craft And The Klan

The Klan Moves North * Jews Attacked * New York World Exposes
Klan's Anti-Catholicism * The Craft And The Klan * The Klan In
Action

5. Footsteps In The Sand

A Tombstone Becomes A Stepping Stone * A Klansman Moves To
CJ.S. Senate * The Court's Ku Kluxer * Black Evades The Issue

6. The Craft Fights Religion-Clause History

The Historic Record Of Religion In American Life * State Constitutions

* Constitutional Conventions * Debates In First Congress * Federal

5

Legislation * Messages And Addresses Of Presidents * Days Of
Thanksgiving And Prayer * Earlier Supreme Court Decisions *
Masonic View Of Religion Clause * BluePrint For Court's Re-Direction
* Masonic Argument In Perspective

7. Defusing The Parochial Aid Bomb

"The G.I. Bill Of Rights" * Parochial School Aid At The Threshold *
Enter Justice Black * The Assault On Parochial Aid * Congress
Presses On * Everson Wends Its Way

8. Everson: Masonic Justice Built On Sand

Further Preference For Non-Belief * The "Religion" Of The Religion-
Clause * Reaction To Everson * McCollum Reinforces Everson
Philosophy * Everson's Enduring Impact * How Religion-Clause
Cases Came To Court * Secularizing Religious Colleges * Melding
The Craft And The Court--A Summary

9. Warring On The Church--II

The Catholic Population Threat * Catholics Help Masons * The
Church's Rapprochement With Masonry

PART III: TARGET-THE STATE

10. Warring On The State

Masonry In The Civil War * President Andrew Johnson And Masonry *
Masonry And The Philippine Insurrection * The American Connection
With Philippine Masonry * Masonry And World War I * Communism
And Freemasonry * The Craft And Spanish Communism *
Communist China And Masonry * Masonry, Communism And The
Catholic Church * Masonry's Political Orientation Confirmed *
Masonry Wins Again * Masonry In Japan

PART IV: TARGETING MEN FOR THE FRATERNITY

11. How It's Done

The Lure * Targeting The Candidates * The Binding Oaths *
Symbolism * Masonry And The Media * Masonry And Politics * The
Fraternity's Disguised Power * The Military And Masonry

AFTERWORD

APPENDIX A * Masonic Justices

6

APPENDIX B * George Washington's Masonry
APPENDIX C * The Ancient Mysteries

NOTES

7

AMAZING DISCOVERY

Prejudice by Supreme Court Justices is not a thought which
comes readily to mind when thinking of the American system of
justice.

Yet, for at least three decades (beginning in the 1940s) the
opinions of a significant number of Justices were influenced by an
anti-Christian and anti-Catholic philosophy when rulings were
fashioned on the religion clause of the First Amendment to the CJ.S.
Constitution. ("Congress shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. . .")

Moreover, because of stare decisis--the legal doctrine which holds
that a principle of law established by one judicial decision is accepted
as an authoritative precedent for resolving similar legal conflicts--the
religion-clause opinions rendered by the Court during that 30-year
epoch have formed the basis for virtually all subsequent decisions on
the clause since that time.

Although many people have been outraged by the Court's
decisions regarding the place of religion under the Constitution, most
citizens are convinced the American judicial system is eminently fair
and just.

The latter view prevails largely because of a perception that Court
nominees are carefully scrutinized to assure representation on the
bench of a broad spectrum of the nation's varied groups. For
example, it is generally thought that certain segments of the
population have a non-defined "right" to a seat on the Court. When
selections for a vacancy on the bench are under consideration,
careful thought is given to a "Black seat," a "Jewish seat," a "Catholic
seat," and a "woman's seat," not to mention choosing jurists who are
sympathetic to labor, industry, and the medical and academic
fraternities.

Strangely, however, mention is never made of two other groups in
society which apparently have been successful in making silent
claims to seats on the Court. Those two groups are Unitarians and
Freemasons. Masons dominated the high bench from 1941 to 1971.
That was an era when traditional Judeo-Christian values were
removed from the curricula of public schools--and from public life
generally.

8

That amazing (and rarely discussed) facet of American
jurisprudence was discovered completely by accident when the
author was conducting research on the religion clause of the First
Amendment to the Constitution.

Court's Dramatic Reversal On Traditional

Religion

The research focused on trying to find a rationale for the Court's
dramatic reversal of the role of Judeo-Christian religious values in
public life, beginning in the 1940s.

Careful study showed that the Court's 1947 Everson decision^ was
the keystone opinion upon which almost all subsequent religion-
clause cases have been based. However, close scrutiny of the clause
and the history of its conception and adoption failed to uncover
convincing evidence to support the Court's view that the Constitution
erected a "wall" which separates things religious from things civil in
our society.

For example, neither Constitutional history nor legal precedent
prior to Everson support the following words frequently quoted from
the majority opinion in that decision: "The 'establishment of religion'
clause of the First Amendment means at least this: . . .No tax in any
amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious
activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever
form they may adopt to teach or practice religion ... In the words of
Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was
intended to erect 'a wall of separation between church and State.'
Reynolds v. CJnited States, supra at 164."^

Following Everson, the Court repeatedly leaned on the "wall" to
impose its will, and prohibited public financial assistance to children
attending schools teaching traditional religious values.

As a consequence, the high bench: outlawed released time for
children to attend religious classes within public school buildings;^
declared atheism and secular humanism to be religions protected by
the First Amendment;"^ prohibited recitation of prayer in public
schools, even though the prayer in question was approved by leaders
of the three major faiths in the CJnited States;^ and banned recitation
of the "Our Father" and oral Bible reading as religious exercises in
public schools.®

Related cases denied State funds to religious-oriented schools for

9

teaching aids, periodicals, maps, etc.; banned singing of Christmas
carols in public schools; prohibited public school teachers from
teaching in religious schools; and held that a law permitting
employees to observe the Sabbath as a day of rest impermissibly
advanced a particular religious practice, and thus violated the
religion clause.

Those decisions by the Court seemed to demonstrate a bias in
favor of a totally secularist society, and my research could uncover
no convincing evidence that the First Amendment ever was intended
to quarantine religion from public life, a proposition being advanced
suddenly by the Court in the 1940s.

The Court's curious tilt stirred nagging questions:

Why did the high bench suddenly take up an interminable series
of religion-clause cases in the middle of the 20th Century?

Why did the high bench in these latter years seem to ignore the
legislative history of the religion clause in the Constitutional
Conventions, and when it was crafted by the First Congress and sent
to the people for ratification?

Why was a figure of speech--"a wall of separation between church
and State"--enshrined as a rule of law?

Legal briefs submitted by attorneys in the various religion-clause
cases provided no answers; nor did the Court's numerous opinions on
the subject illuminate the dilemma.

Bias On The Bench

And then, by accident, the obvious answer suddenly suggested
itself in mid-summer, 1975: There was bias on the bench.

That insight into the puzzle was partially provided by a 1975
article in The Washington Post, titled, "The World of Felix
Frankfurter," which basically consisted of excerpts from a book by
Joseph P. Lash, based on diaries of the late Justice Felix Frankfurter.

The article quoted Frankfurter's colleague. Justice Louis D.
Brandeis, commenting on Justice Hugo L. Black, author of the
majority opinion in the seminal Everson decision. Some justices in
the minority on that decision viewed Brother Black as being less
rigorous than they in denying state aid to Catholic schools. Brandeis
said:

"Black hasn't the faintest notion of what tolerance means, and
while he talks a lot about democracy, he is totally devoid of its

10

underlying demand which is tolerance of his own behavior. . .

That excerpt prompted me to visit the Manuscript Division of the
Library of Congress to read portions of Frankfurter's diaries and
papers, as well as available papers of the other Justices who had
participated in the Everson decision.

A box of Frankfurter's papers, titled "Photocopies of Missing
Manuscripts," contained a record of a conversation between
Frankfurter and Brandeis, dated July 1 (no year, although internal
evidence suggests 1922), in which the latter is quoted as saying he
"never realized until [he] came to the Supreme Court how much
(judges] are diverted by passion and prejudice and how closed the
mind can be . ®

in a conversation with Chief Justice William Howard Taft, Brandeis
said the "lines of cleavage on the Court" are not political differences
between Democrats and Republicans, but "on progressiveness, so
called--views as to property."®

Conversing with Frankfurter on July 2, 1924, Brandeis said there
is a great deal of "lobbying" on the Court, and results are achieved
"not by legal reasoning, but by finesse and subtlety."^®

Further, memoranda in Frankfurter's files (and in the files of other
Justices) make clear that the minority opinions in the Everson
decision reflected strong disapproval of the opinions and tactics of
Justices William O. Douglas and Black, particularly because Black's
majority opinion (joined in by Douglas) conceded that the State of
New Jersey, if it chose to do so, could pay transportation costs for
children to attend Catholic elementary schools. The minority were
adamantly opposed to such a concession to the free exercise of
religion.

in an April 30, 1952 memo to Frankfurter following the Zorach v.
Clauson decision (343 CJ.S. 306), Justice Robert H. Jackson stated
that the "battle for separation of Church and School is lost."

He added: "The doctrine of separation never had a chance against
pressure groups, except that this Court should unswervingly apply it
as an absolute ....

"The wavering came," he went on, "in Everson. Black, in all good
faith, believed that strong words about separation of Church and State
would be acceptable to its enemies if it were seasoned with bus fare
refunds. What he overlooked was that the enemies of separation were
at once given an incentive to further aggression and the dialectics to
support it. . ^

in a March 9, 1948 diary entry. Frankfurter wrote that Justice
Harold O. Burton "hasn't the remotest idea how malignant men like

11

Black and Douglas not only can be, but are."

Noting that Black's majority opinion in Everson contained "noble
sentiments" [favoring the supposed "wall of separation"], Frankfurter
said Burton did not realize "it is characteristic of Black to utter noble
sentiments and depart from them in practice--a tactic of which the
Everson opinion is a beautiful illustration."^^

Frankfurter also apparently felt it historically useful to retain in his
files a letter, dated April 12, 1945, from a correspondent at the
Clniversity of Texas Law School which thanked the Justice "for your
refusal to attend" a dinner given in Black's honor.

The correspondent added: "The perfume of public praise from
people who ought to know better cannot eliminate the odor of the
skunk. Official utterances may fool the public, but there is still no
substitute for character..."

The writer was referring to Black.

Justice Frankfurter's Religious Biases

That initial peek into papers of Justice Frankfurter revealed that
interpretation of the Constitution frequently is subject to the personal
prejudices of the Justices more often than is suspected.

Furthermore, as 1 perused Justice Frankfurter's papers, it became
evident that he, like most people, had his own personal biases. His
opinions in a number of religion-clause cases suggest that his
personal views entered into the judicial opinions he rendered.

For example, he admitted to being "a reverent agnostic" who did
not believe in "spiritual Messiahs,and that he was "rather leery of
explicit ethical instruction."^^

To a colleague on the bench (Wiley B. Rutledge) he said he did
"not yield acceptance" to two earlier Supreme Court decisions that
long had been viewed--particularly by many parents--as the Judicial
bedrock upon which rested the Constitutional right of fathers, mothers
and legal guardians to educate their children in schools compatible
with their religious beliefs. Those cases are: Pierce v. Society of
Sisters and Meyer v. Nebraska.^®

in Pierce, the Court had held: "The fundamental theory of liberty
upon which this Onion reposes excludes any general power of the
State to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction
from public teachers only . .

in Meyer, the Court said the legislature of Nebraska had attempted
to "interfere with . . .the power of the parents to control the education

12

of their young." But, said the high bench, no legislature "could impose
such restrictions upon the people of a State without doing great
violence to both the letter and spirit of the Constitution."^®

The position taken by Frankfurter with his colleague, Rutledge,
differed dramatically from the view he had held some years earlier
when he was a professor at Harvard CJniversity.

His papers show that he wrote a letter to the editor of The New
York Times in 1925 expressing support for that newspaper's editorial
comment favoring the Court's Pierce decision.^® The letter in the
Times prompted John H. Cowles, Grand Commander of Scottish Rite
Freemasonry of the Southern Jurisdiction, to write the Harvard
professor a note expressing opposition to the future Supreme Court
Justice's opinion regarding Pierce.^®

Frankfurter replied to Cowles: "1 share your devotion to the public
school, and am eager as you are that no divisive influences, due to
difference of race or religion, should assert themselves in the
common bond that makes a nation.

"But," he continued, "1 do not want devotions coerced . . .coerced
convictions are not truly convictions and are the most doubtful of
foundations upon which to build.

Those remarks by Frankfurter strongly indicated that his position
favoring a "wall of separation" between Church and State in the
Everson case was influenced more by personal bias than by the spirit,
intention and legislative history of the religion clause of the First
Amendment.

But there was more about Justice Frankfurter that raised questions
as to his judicial objectivity regarding the First Right of the Bill of
Rights.

His papers show he was a close personal friend and admirer of
many views held by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes and Harold J.
Laski, two men who seemed to share anti-Catholic views. In that
regard. Frankfurter wrote a foreword to a book titled. The Holmes-
Laski Letters, The Correspondence Of Mr. Justice Holmes And Harold
J. Laski, 1916-1935.22

In the foreword, he extolled the correspondence book, and said the
Letters "surpass all others from the pen . . .high themes canvassed
with enormous learning . . . expressing convictions unmarred by
intolerance . . ."2®

Although Justice Frankfurter viewed the letters as "unmarred by
intolerance," there are passages in the volume which can be
considered anti-Catholic. For example, a flippant remark is made

13

about the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary.^'^ And Laski
wrote that education which is not secular and compulsory "is not
education.The Catholic Church, the latter said, should be
"confined to Limbo . . .[and] above all. Saint Augustine . . .

in one letter to Holmes, the British Socialist Laski commented that
"no one can read Catholic books and still believe in God--the thing is
too utterly puerile to fit a big world like this."^^

Laski also wrote of the "incapacity of the Roman Church to tell the
truth,and declared that he had certain profound convictions,
among which was the following: "It is impossible to make peace with
the Roman Catholic Church. It is one of the permanent enemies of all
that is decent in the human spirit."^®

Granted, those are statements by Laski, not by Frankfurter. But, it
was the jurist himself who asserted in a foreword to the book that the
communications between Laski and Holmes were "unmarred by
intolerance." Since the above passages clearly demonstrate an
"intolerance" toward the Catholic Church, there is at least a
suggestion that the Jurist shared his friend's viewpoint toward those
aspects of Catholicism mentioned in the Letters.

The same can be said for Frankfurter's silence regarding the
views set forth by Holmes in a letter to Laski concerning a book
intended for use by Catholic schoolchildren which depicted Hell.

"It led me to wonder," wrote Holmes, "whether the world would not
be better off if we never had invented the notion of sin . . .It makes me
sick at heart, when one thinks what automatic dolls we are, to hear
poor little devils told that what they thought were good actions were
bad, because they had a thought of reward or punishment and did not
do it simply for Christ--and the next minute to hear a puke in an apron
[i.e., a Catholic nun] trying to scare them stiff with a picture of hell
they are likely to be sent to . . . .As I was saying the other day, I don't
believe men who took an active part in ordinary life could or at any
rate would have invented such mean and dirty spiritual tortures . . .
m30

Frankfurter apparently sent his friend Dean Acheson, the former
G.S. Secretary of State, an autographed copy of the Letters, and
received the following response:

"Dear Felix:

The Holmes-Laski letters are a great Joy and delight. Your
inscription moves me much. I think the letters will raise hell in
several quarters. The Catholics who have been taking pot
shots at O.W.H. will get Juicy ammunition, as well as fury. 'The

14

puke in an apron' will be hard to take . . .

Dean"3i

Obviously, Mr. Acheson detected an anti-Catholic tone in Justice
Holmes' remarks, even though Frankfurter, in his foreword, indicates
he does not view such anti-Catholic remarks as "intolerance."

In passing, it is worthy of note that Laski was keenly aware that the
judiciary is of inestimable value in shaping societies, such as ours,
which are governed by three co-equal branches of government.^^

My perception of Justice Frankfurter's impartiality was further
eroded when 1 read a letter he had written to Professor Eugene V.
Rostow on August 9, 1957, in which he said: "After all, it isn't for
nothing that for years 1 was one of the counsel of the American Civil
Liberties Onion . .

That statement raises serious ethical questions when it is recalled
that ACLO attorneys appeared regularly before the high bench in
numerous religion-clause cases at a time when Frankfurter was a
sitting Justice.

For example, in the Everson and McCollum cases, the ACLO filed
"friend of the court" briefs supporting the appellants. In Zorach, Leo
Pfeffer, a member of the ACLO and one of its cooperating attorneys,
represented the appellant and opposed release of public school
students to attend religion classes off public school property. Also, in
Torcaso, Lawrence Speiser, executive director of the ACLO's
Washington, D.C. office, was joined by Pfeffer in representing the
appellant, Mr. Torcaso. The ACLO attorneys argued that a belief in
God could not be constitutionally imposed as a criterion for holding
public office at State level.

In all of those cases. Justice Frankfurter voted to support the
position argued by the ACLO.^'^ Moreover, it seems that the positions
argued by the ACLO attorneys were compatible with views we have
noted Frankfurter expressed with regard to belief in God, "spiritual
Messiahs," "explicit ethical instruction," and parental rights in
education.

In that regard, attention is invited to note 34, supra, where it is
shown that Canon number 3 of the American Bar Association's
Canons on Judicial Ethics stipulates: "A judge . . .should not suffer his
conduct to justify the impression that any person can improperly
influence or unduly enjoy his favor, or that he is affected by kinship,
rank, position or influence of any party or other person."

The more 1 read the papers of the members of the Court, the more
impressed 1 was that the scale of justice in religion-clause cases was

15

tilted by a finger of bias.

We have seen that the ACLCJ attorneys convinced the Court that
the beliefs of atheists should be protected; and it is abundantly
evident that the "reverent" agnosticism of Justice Frankfurter has not
been proscribed in the public forum. With that in mind, it has become
increasingly difficult to comprehend how the Court can deny equal
protection to students who believe in Judeo-Christian values.

Time after time, the Justices have ruled that the State can in
virtually no way provide those students benefits (except for the
purposes of safety). Simultaneously, the high bench has repeatedly
emphasized that the beliefs of atheists and agnostics should not be
infringed in the nation's public educational system. No Court decision
has limited the fora where the philosophy and values of the latter two
groups may be propagated.

Unitarian Influence

This double standard was further emphasized by Justice Harold
Burton's attitude toward the religion clause.

His papers reflect that he was an eminent member of All Soul's
Clnitarian Church in Washington, D.C. In April, 1947, his pastor, A.
Powell Davies, invited the Justice to attend a commemorative
service at the Jefferson Memorial in the nation's capital. The letter of
invitation made clear that Thomas Jefferson was an ardent Clnitarian,
and Pastor Davies expressed the hope that the occasion "will
contribute substantially to exalting the spiritual and moral faith held
by Jefferson . . Rev. Davies also made clear that "Jefferson's
Bible" would be read at the service.

"Jefferson's Bible" is a relatively little known work by the nation's
third President. It essentially was composed to "extricate the gospel of
Jesus from the maze of amazing and unbelievable dogmas and
superstitions in which he believed it had been almost lost."^®

After the ceremony. Burton wrote a letter to Davies congratulating
him on the event "in honor of the free religious faith of Thomas
Jefferson.

Burton's participation in the event, and his comment on it, were
strikingly contradictory to the position he had taken just two months
earlier in the Everson case. In the dissenting opinion which he Joined
(written by Justice Rutledge, also a Unitarian, who was buried from
Pastor Davies' church),^® it was stated: The religion clause "broadly
forbids State support, financial or other, of religion in any guise, form

16

or degree. It outlaws all use of public funds for religious purposes."^®
Despite that sweeping restriction on State support of religion "in
any guise, form or degree," we find Justice Burton attending a
religious service, in a building constructed and maintained with tax
funds, for the precise purpose of giving the dignity and prestige of his
august position as a Justice in the highest court in the land to join in
"exalting the spiritual and moral faith held by Jefferson."

Justice Rutledge, in the dissent concurred in by Burton, also
advanced the following strange concept of liberty, which is found
nowhere in the Constitution nor in the history of the origin and
development of that fundamental charter of liberties:

"Like St. Paul's freedom, religious liberty with a great price
must be bought. And for those who exercise it most fully, by
insisting upon religious education for their children mixed with
secular, by terms of our Constitution the price is greater than
for others.'"'^®

That is a stunning statement and a novel interpretation of the First
Amendment. It is at odds with the Declaration of Independence, which
insists "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their
Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." (Emphasis added).

It is a statement totally contrary to Section 1 of the Fourteenth
Amendment, which echoes the "Declaration."

in reality, the Constitution nowhere demands a price greater for the
religious liberty of Catholics and others who choose to integrate their
religious values into education mandated by the State.

Rutledge, who had close ties to CJnitarianism (or CJnitarian
CJniversalism), must have known that the founder of CJnitarianism,
Michael Servitus, "with a great price" spoke against the reality of the
Holy Trinity. He was seized in Geneva by order of John Calvin and
was burned at the stake on October 27, 1553.^^ But our Constitution
gives his followers no greater freedom than is accorded to those
Christians and Jews who conscientiously insist on education which
recognizes that "a knowledge of God is the beginning of wisdom."

So, if such restrictions on members of certain religious groups in
our country do not exist in the Constitution, perhaps other influences
helped to shape the Supreme Court's Everson decision. Could that
influence have been CJnitarian philosophy?

it has been noted that Justices Burton and Rutledge were attached
to CJnitarian beliefs. Moreover, the two of them, along with Justices

J7

Black and Douglas, were close friends of Pastor Davies.

Justice Douglas edited a book of commentary by Davies,
published in 1959, in which he said that Justice and Mrs. Black "were
choice friends" of the CJnitarian Pastor."^^ Douglas also observed that
his colleague. Justice Rutledge, "was drawn to Dr. Davies by a close
spiritual kinship.""^^

The papers of Justice Black contain a copy of one of Pastor
Davies' sermons in which the minister said there is no "devil," no
"diabolical powers or satanic elements in life."'^"^

Following the death of his first wife. Justice Black was remarried
in 1956 by Davies.'^^

in 1957, Black wrote a note of condolence to Mrs. Davies when
her husband died, and told her he had turned to the Pastor for help "in
time of sorrow and in time of joy.

in 1959, Black wrote to Mr. Russell B. Adams, chairman of the
Davies Memorial Committee, to express his interest in "advancing
liberal religion.

in 1963, Justice Black attended services at All Souls Clnitarian
Church and listened to an entire sermon extolling the G.S. Supreme
Court's many liberal decisions.'^® His records also show he
contributed $325 to that church between 1959-1963.'^®

According to a Religious News Service dispatch in 1976, the
distinctive value system of Unitarian Gniversalists "is least like that of
Christians and most like that of nonbelievers."

That identifying characteristic of Unitarian beliefs was set forth in
a study by Dr. Robert L'H. Miller, a Unitarian Universalist minister and
associate professor of religion at Tufts University, the RNS press
report said.®®

Miller said that Unitarians hold Salvation "comes close to being a
disvalue," as does Forgiveness. He characterized Unitarianism as
being "[e]go oriented," and said Unitarian "values focus on
competence rather than on morals."®^

Pastor Davies insisted: "The religions of the creeds are
obsolescent. . . the basis of their claims expired with yesterday."®^

Liberalism, said Davies, causes "us to put our trust in the
free exertions of our own minds instead of in the dogmas of
the long-established churches . . . .Yes, it was liberalism
which forswore the supernatural and forsook the ancient
revelation."®®

18

He also stated: "There is a religion that says Freedom! Freedom
from ignorance and false belief. Freedom from spurious claims and
bitter prejudices. Freedom . . .with minds unimpaired by cramping
dogmas and spirits uncrippled by abject dependence.

"Nostalgia," said Pastor Davies, "can go back to the old time
religion ... it can go back to the wish for supernatural intervention, or
salvationism. it can make a mother image of the Virgin Mary--which
is what the ancients used to do with their earth-goddesses, who were
also always virgins and always mothers--or it can do something
similar with Jesus of Nazareth, it can turn God into a deified image of
human sentimentalism."

Referring to the traditional Christian beliefs which he ridiculed in
the passage immediately above, the CJnitarian intimate of the Justices
said those holding traditional Christian beliefs make no effort to
achieve a fully human level, but rather adhere to a realm of "fantasy"
which, if sustained, "will surely bring us to disaster."^^

Speaking of "this ancient God of miracles and interventions,"
Davies says He is "really dead," and there is "no longer any kindness
in letting anyone cling to such a fantasy. For if that is where we put our
faith, our dependence, or reliance, we shall be wiped off the face of
the earth."56

Justice Douglas, in his foreword to Davies' book, said the
CJnitarian pastor once wrote a friend [Douglas?]:

"1 do not think that morality depends upon any particular
system of religious doctrine. The ecclesiastical imperialism
which claims that there cannot be a universal good society
until Christian doctrine is accepted is both mischievous and
grotesque. What is needed is the identification of the spiritual
and moral values in all the great provinces of religious culture
(and outside them), so that the world may have a common
basis for its united life."^^

Douglas said Davies "pleaded for the removal of the supernatural
from religion." in that connection, he quoted his CJnitarian friend as
saying:

"There is no God in the sky. God is in the heart that loves
the sky's blueness. There is no army of angels, no hosts of
seraphim, and no celestial hierarchy. All this is man's
imagining . . . ."^®

J9

Davies also declared: "Very little that entered into Christianity
came from Jesus.

Clearly, Christians have reason to question the objectivity of
Justice Burton in deciding religion-clause cases when it is known that
he was active in advancing "the free religious faith of Thomas
Jefferson," a man who denied the Divinity of Christ, and opposed
Trinitarian Christianity.

Further, Justice Rutledge's "close spiritual kinship" with a pastor
who denigrated traditional Christian beliefs and declared that the
"ancient God of miracles is dead," also raises doubts as to his sense
of fairness in deciding such cases.

And certainly Justice Black's expressed commitment to
"advancing liberal religion" chills those who looked for balance when
the CJ.S. Supreme Court decided cases involving "the establishment
of religion or the free exercise thereof."

More Cause For Concern: Freemasonry

But there was even more cause for concern by the average
citizen. Justice Burton's papers led to the most surprising revelation
of all: the influential role played by Freemasonry in shaping G.S.
Supreme Court decisions involving the position of conventional
religion in American life and, in all likelihood, numerous other
decisions which collectively changed the social fabric of the nation
between 1941-1971.

On October 13, 1949, Mcllyar H. Lichliter sent a letter to Burton,
addressing him as a 33rd degree Freemason. Lichliter, a 33rd degree
Mason and Grand Prior of the Supreme Council, Scottish Rite, of the
Northern Jurisdiction, Boston, Massachusetts, was responding to
Burton's letter of October 8, 1949.

The Grand Prior wrote of a visit to the ancient Abbey of St. Marie,
Longues-Sur-Mer, Calvados, France, which was owned and occupied
by former Congressman Charles S. Dewey. The Abbey is the site of
the tomb of Jacques DeMolay, the one-time Master of the Knights
Templar before his execution in the 14th Century following a lengthy
trial by both the Catholic Church and Philip IV (also known as "Philip
the Fair"), King of France.

Lichliter wrote: "As you know. Pope Clement V and Philip the Fair
did a thorough Job on May 11, 1314 when Jacques DeMolay was
burned at the stake in Paris. They destroyed the records of the
Templars or--as many believe--buried them in the Archives of the

20

Vatican . . .

At that point, the word "quote" is handwritten in pencil, apparently
to emphasize that particular passage for future citation.

Lichliter also observed that Justice Jackson had been nominated
to receive the 33rd degree of Freemasonry.®®

The letter's emphasis on Freemasonry, the Templars, a Pope and
the Vatican stimulated my curiosity. Also arousing interest was the
fact that two Supreme Court Justices were identified as Masons, and
one of those men had retained in his files a letter from a fellow high-
ranking Mason which indicated the Catholic Church had been
responsible for executing a person esteemed by the Masons.

The recurring references to Freemasonry, and membership in that
organization by members of the Court, suggested that a check of the
historic record was in order to determine whether Masonic
membership was a common characteristic of Justices over the years.

The record shows that from the inception of the Supreme Court in
1789 through 1940, there never were more than three Masonic
Justices during any term, except on two occasions. During the period
1882-1887, four Masonically identified Justices sat on a nine-man
bench, and a similar situation prevailed during the 1921-1922 term.

However, suddenly, beginning with appointments to the Court by
President Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933-1945)--himself an ardent
Mason--and continuing through the first three years (1969-1971) of
President Richard M. Nixon's first term (President Nixon is not known
to have been a Mason), members of the international secret society
dominated the high bench in ratios ranging from five to four
(beginning in 1941) to seven to two (beginning in 1946).

During the 1949-1956 terms, seven members of the Craft served
on the Court with a former Mason, Justice Sherman Minton, who had
resigned from the Fraternity in 1946.®^

A complete footnoted listing of Masonic membership on the Court,
beginning in 1789 and continuing through 1984, is set forth in
Appendix A.

Additionally, beginning with the appointment of Justice Felix
Frankfurter to the high tribunal in 1939, Justices who are not known to
have been Masons but whose philosophy, it will be found, paralleled
the thinking of Masonry, shared the bench with Masonic Justices.

Besides Frankfurter, those Justices were: Frank Murphy (1940-
1949); William J. Brennan (1956- );®^ Arthur J. Goldberg (1962-
1965); and Abe Fortas (1965-1970).®^

The dominance of Masons appointed to the Court by President
Franklin D. Roosevelt raises a suspicion that FDR's highly

21

controversial "court-packing plan" of 1937 may have been a
deliberate effort to bring a preponderance of Masonic philosophy to
the high bench.

In that regard, it is interesting to note that four Masons, who
subsequently were appointed to the Court by Roosevelt, or President
Harry S. Truman (also an ardent Mason), made statements supporting
the "court-packing plan." Those men were: Hugo L. Black; James F.
Byrnes; Sherman Minton; and Robert Jackson.®"^

During that period of Masonic dominance of the high bench, the
attention of the Court suddenly seemed to focus on religion-clause
cases. Moreover, the verdicts in those cases, one after another,
placed increasing restrictions on the propagation of traditional
religious values in the public arena. Indeed, those decisions by the
Court reflected an unabashed bias favorable to the philosophies of
Masonry and CJnitarianism.

Those years also marked an epoch of revolutionary liberalism.
This was evidenced, not only by the Court's obvious determination to
move the nation away from an emphasis on Judeo-Christian values in
public life, but also by a series of decisions, the cumulative effect of
which encouraged the sale and distribution of lewd, obscene, and
immoral matter.®^

Further, it was a time when the Court dramatically reversed its
long-held position that there is no Constitutional right to advocate
overthrow of the government by force and violence.®®

With specific reference to the religion-clause, the record shows
that Masonic Justices voted with remarkable consistency.

Common agreement by the Court's Masonic contingent in a
number of religion-clause cases is evidenced by the following
decisions which show a striking accord among such Justices in
relation to their number of the bench: Everson, 7 of 7 (although the
decision was 5 to 4, there was no indication in the opinions that
Masonic Justices disagreed as to the importance of the "wall of
separation" theory, nor on the importance of Virginia in crafting the
religion-clause); McCollum, 6 of 7; Torasco, 6 of 6; Engel, 6 of 6;
Abington, 5 of 6; and Lemon, 4 of 5.

Discovering Masonry's Secrets

When 1 discovered that Freemasons had dominated the Supreme
Court, my knowledge of the Craft was minimal. However, in a general
way, the Fraternity had left a favorable impression, primarily because

22

a Shriner's parade in Washington, D.C. in the mid-1960s brought
much pleasure to my wife and our very young children.

After noting that so many Justices were members of the Craft, it
seemed highly important to learn the philosophy and teachings of the
organization. The problem was finding such knowledge when the
Fraternity is known to operate in secrecy.

However, it is commonly known that the Intelligence community
collects most of its information by carefully culling open sources.

Because so many of the Justices and other high government
officials, including President Roosevelt, were known to be members of
the Scottish Rite of the Southern Jurisdiction, it seemed appropriate to
search for the journal used by that organization to communicate with
its membership on a regular basis. That publication is the New Age
magazine, a monthly periodical.

In one issue of that Journal, a member of the Rite said the New
Age is "generally recognized as the most influential and widely read
Masonic publication in the world.

Accordingly, 1 consumed much time by reading every page of
each monthly issue of that journal covering the years 1921 through
1981. The wisdom of that approach was confirmed in a report by the
Craft itself, which stated:

"The monthly issues of the New Age, if combined, would

present a fine summary of Scottish Rite philosophy in action .
m68

They surely do. And when augmented by wide-ranging reading
from a number of works related to the Craft (most of which were
suggested by New Age articles or editorial commentary), it is evident
that international Freemasonry historically has been a revolutionary
world-wide movement organized to advance Kabbalistic Gnosticism;
to undermine and, if possible, to destroy Christianity; to infuse
Masonic philosophy into key government structures; and to subvert
any government which does not comport with Masonic principles.

All evidence points to the fact that most members of the Masonic
Fraternity are largely ignorant of its sinister designs.

It also must be stated emphatically that there is no evidence
available which suggests any member of the Court ever subscribed to
Masonry's revolutionary and subversive activities. That is not to say
many of them have not shared the Craft's strong opposition both to the
Roman Catholic Church, and to encouraging or advancing traditional
Judeo-Christian religious beliefs and values.

The facts available indicate that most men are lured into Masonry

23

by the appeal of its deceptive facade which promises brotherhood,
charitable and benevolent endeavors, and, not insignificantly, an
opportunity for personal advancement in employment or in public life.
However, once behind the lodge door, the nascent Mason learns
quickly that charity begins at home, and that he is bound to the
Fraternity by solemn oaths and threats of gruesome bodily harm and
death if he should disclose Masonry's secrets.

Research makes clear that a vast amount of information exposing
the clandestine and revolutionary activities of international
Freemasonry has been known for years. However, the power and
influence of the Craft is so awesomely effective that any effort to
engage in a rational discussion of the Fraternity causes eyes to glaze
over, and the issue, almost always, is automatically dismissed as a
subject for discussion.

Such a conditioned reflex manifests a curious and arbitrary
limitation on the age-old hallmark of the American concept of civil
discourse known as the free exchange of ideas.

in fact, that uniquely American appreciation of open debate
regarding important issues would seem to make secret societies an
anachronism in this country. Yet, the fact is, membership in
Freemasonry is larger in the United States than in any other country
in the world.

it is now time to lift the veil to expose Masonry's underlying
philosophy and its nefarious activities both abroad and in America.

24

PART I

UNDERSTANDING THE
CONFLICT

25

1/ LIFTING THE VEIL

Although Freemasonry operates secretly, there is a surprising
amount of information available about its influence on society.

For example, an article in the New Age, in 1946, called attention
to the following remark by former French premier Andre Tardieu, who
had died the previous year:

"Freemasonry does not explain everything; yet, if we
leave it out of account, the history of our times is
unintelligible."^

Masonic author and commentator Arthur E. Waite, writing about
the 33rd degree of Freemasonry, said:

"It must be confessed that the whole scheme has a certain
aspect of conspiracy continually presenting itself and as
frequently eluding the mental grasp.

In 1976, a book by Fred Zeller, former Grand Master of the Grand
Orient of France, titled, Trois Points, C'est Tout (Three Points, That's
All), revealed that between 1870 and 1971, France was dominated by
Freemasons who fought through two major anti-clerical reforms in a
battle against Church influence.^

And, in 1981, the world learned of the machinations of Grand
Master Licio Gelli's Masonic Lodge known as Propaganda Due, or P-2,
which had precipitated the fall of the Italian Government that same
year.

Despite that known background of Masonic intrigue, there
continues to be a reluctance by the media and social commentators
to expose Masonry's long history of working to subvert Church and
State.

It is true the press did inform the public that Gelli's lodge included
three Cabinet ministers, two under-secretaries, 30 members of
Parliament, 70 top military officers, and a number of magistrates, civil
servants, industrialists, university professors, policemen and
journalists, among whom was the editor and publisher of one of the
nation's most prestigious daily newspapers, Corriere delta Sera.

26

The press also disclosed the financial machinations and tragedies
surrounding bankers Roberto Calvi and Michele Sindona, including
the former's strange death at Blackfriar's Bridge in London, and the
involvement of the Vatican Bank with those two Masonic bankers.'^

However, the press gave virtually no attention to the larger picture,
that is, the philosophy and activities of the Freemason Fraternity
itself, of which P-2 was an offspring.

Yet, it must be noted that Rupert Cornwell, Rome correspondent for
the London Financial Times, does say in his book, God's Banker,
which reports on the issue: "As early as 1738 Pope Clement Xll
described Freemasonry as 'Satan's synagogue.' "

And, the British journalist added, the Pope's fears "were well
grounded."^

The Financial Times correspondent characterized P-2 as "a state
within a state," and "little short of a parallel state."® He also observed
that Italy's late Fascist dictator, Benito Mussolini, had outlawed secret
Masonic lodges.^

Still, despite the mind-boggling reality of what this one Roman
Masonic lodge had done by gaining allegiance of so many key
government officials, industrialists, members of the academic
community and others, it seems curious that background information
concerning P-2's parent entity, the Masonic Fraternity itself, was
ignored by the media, it seems curious, because Freemasonry, over
the centuries, is known to have played a secret and extraordinary role
in attempting to mold societies according to its tenets.

What Mussolini Found

However, Cornwell's references to Pope Clement Xll and Mussolini
do provide a clue as to what the world-wide Masonic Fraternity is all
about.

in that regard, the New Age, in one of a series of articles in 1949,
commented on Mussolini's closing of the lodges prior to World War 11.

(The series was written, incidentally, upon the recommendation of
Justice Robert H. Jackson, who at that time was a 32nd degree
Mason, and had recently returned to the United States after having
taken leave from the Supreme Court to serve as Chief Prosecutor at
the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials.)

The article said the Italian dictator had been prompted to
investigate Masonic lodges after he noticed that many Socialist
deputies and government employees "obeyed the orders of

27

Freemasonry in preference to the orders of the Socialist Party."®

It should be noted that the Masonic cult "adhered to Fascism at the
beginning," and "officially was never hostile" to it until II Duce
prepared legislation against secret societies.^

As a result of observing what he perceived as disloyalty among
the Masons, Mussolini approved the appointment of a 15-member
commission comprised "mostly of Senators and university
professors," who "unanimously advised the suppression" of the
lodges--because:

* Italian Freemasonry was "dominated by an anti¬
national state of mind."

* The Craft obliged its members to "deny they are
Masons," thus contributing to "corrupt the character of
Italians."

* Freemasonry used its hold upon the machinery of
Government in favor of purely private interests and ambitions.

The report, in many ways so strikingly similar to the Italian
Government's findings in 1981, further stated:

"Freemasonry has penetrated into the most delicate
organs of the national life, using as its lever the chief banking
institutions . . .Its chief weapon is secrecy, which debases
men's conscience, making them prone to intrigue and
obliging them to submit to discipline against which they
cannot rebel without breaking their vows: [this] forces them to
maintain an internal solidarity which annuls or overcomes
every other duty of loyalty or justice, and . . . insures
immunity to any one who profits by it.

"When one thinks of the characteristics of Freemasonry
which have been set down above, and especially its ties with
similar organizations abroad, one realizes that the existence
of Freemasonry is a phenomenon of such gravity that it
seems unbelievable that the State has permitted it hitherto."^®

At that point, the article refers to a 1947 statement made by John
Cowles, Grand Commander of the Scottish Rite of the Southern
Jurisdiction, for the purpose of emphasizing the preeminent role
played by Raoul V. Palermi, the former Grand Commander of Masonry
in Italy who renounced the Fraternity and became friendly with

28

Mussolini.

Cowles said:

"in Italy, the regular Freemasonry stems as follows:
Garibaldi, Bailor!, Fera, Ricciardi, Burgess (Acting), and
Palermi. The last named was head of both the Grand Lodge
and the Supreme Council. He betrayed them both, proving a
traitor, was expelled from Freemasonry, and later given a
position under Mussolini . . ."

Cowles then referred to the situation facing Masonry in Italy
immediately following World War 11, long after Mussolini had been
murdered. The post-War government, he noted, adopted a new
constitution which included a provision (Article 14) prohibiting the
existence of secret societies.^ ^

The fact that the Grand Commander of Italian Freemasonry was
"given a position under Mussolini" strongly indicates that Mussolini
and his Commission had first-hand evidence about the activities of
Freemasonry.

Further, the fact that the new post-War government felt compelled
to place a provision in the constitution banning secret societies gives
credence to the findings of Mussolini's 15-member commission, and
its fears about what such organizations can do to subvert a State.

However, Cowles noted that the new post-war Prime Minister,
Alcide de Gasperi, a Christian Democrat, insisted that he did not view
Freemasonry as a secret society, and would not war against it.

in retrospect, it appears that de Gasperi's naivete regarding the
Masonic Fraternity in 1947 contributed to the P-2 scandal of 1981.

Church Exposes Masonry In 1738

Freemasonry, as we generally know it today, entered history when
the Grand Lodge of England was established in 1717.

in 1723, Rev. James Anderson, an English divine, wrote his "New
Constitutions" for the Craft, many parts of which were "lifted" from the
works of Jan Amos Komensky (also known as Jan Amos Comenius),
a 17th Century bishop of the Moravian Church. Anderson's
"Constitutions" changed English Masonry from a more or less
Christian orientation to "a universal creed based upon the Fatherhood
of God and the Brotherhood of Man." This fundamental ideology of
Komensky appealed at once "to freethinkers, to rationalists, and to

29

lovers of magic and esoteric rites--to the love of mystery in myths,
symbols and ceremonies.

Fifteen years later, in 1738, Pope Clement Xll, as Rupert Cornwell
observed, issued his Pontifical Constitution, in Eminenti. The Pontiff
declared:

"We have resolved and decreed to condemn and forbid
such [secret] societies, assemblies, reunions, conventions,
aggregations or meetings, called either Freemasonic or
known under some other denomination. We condemn and
forbid them by this, our present constitution, which is to be
considered valid forever.

"We commend to the faithful to abstain from intercourse
with those societies . . .in order to avoid excommunication,
which will be the penalty imposed upon all those contravening
to this, our order, none except at the point of death could be
absolved of this sin, except by us or the then existing Roman
Pontiff."

That, indeed, was a very severe indictment of blossoming
Masonry, to have the Pope caution his international flock that
membership in this new secret society was considered a "reserved
sin," absolution for which, except at the point of death, being reserved
to the Holy Father personally. However, just thirteen years later. Pope
Benedict XIV, in his Pontifical Constitution, Providas, reaffirmed
Clement's censure of Masonry and similar secret societies. Moreover,
since that time "more than 200" documents issued by the Vatican
have condemned Masonry, although the "reserved sin" status was
dispensed with by Pope Paul VI, and a Catholic rapprochement with
the secret society began in the 1940s. That aspect of Masonic-
Catholic Church relationships will be discussed later.

Barruel And Robison's Revelations

The general public's first true insight into Freemasonry did not
come until 81 years after the Fraternity's founding, when two books
lifted the veil which so decorously had concealed the Craft's
activities, except as had been exposed earlier by the Vatican and,
occasionally, by heads of State.

One book. Proofs of a Conspiracy . . ., was by John Robison,
highly regarded professor of philosophy and member of the Royal

30

Society of Edinburg. The Scottish professor said he found Masonry on
the Continent much different from how he knew it in the Lodges of
England. Continental Masonry, he wrote, exhibited "a strange mixture
of mysticism, theosophy, cabalistic whim, real science, fanaticism
and freethinking, both in religion and politics." He found, too, that
although everything was expressed decently, "atheism, materialism,
and discontent with civil subordination pervade the whole."

A more detailed expose of the Craft was set forth in a four-volume
work. Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism, by the Abbe
Augusten de Barruel, a refugee from Revolutionary France, whose
third volume was going to press just as Robison's book was being
published (1798).^®

Barruel charged that many years prior to the French Revolution,
men who called themselves "philosophers" had conspired against the
God of the Gospel, against Christianity, without distinction of worship.
The grand object of the "conspiracy," the Abbe asserted, was to
overturn every altar where Christ was adored.

These philosophers, the Abbe asserted, formed the sophisters of
rebellion, who joined with Freemasons--a group he characterized as
having a "long history" of hatred for Christ and kings. Continuing, the
French-born cleric said that from this coalition came the "Sophisters
of Impiety and Anarchy," who conspired "against every religion,
every government, against all civil society, and even against all
property ..." This latter crowd became known as the Illuminati, from
which sprang the Jacobins.^®

Although this philosophy was believed to have been gestated in
England, in reality, said the Abbe, it is "the error of every man who
judges everything by the standard of his own reason, and rejects in all
religious matters every authority that is not derived from the light of
nature. It is the error of denying every possibility of any mystery
beyond the limits of man's reason, and the discard of Revelation."^®

The leading "philosophers" of whom Barruel spoke were the major
Encyclopedists: Voltaire, Frederick II, King of Prussia, Denis Diderot
and Jean D'Alembert. These men, he asserted, "acted in concert" to
destroy Christianity, and, he declared, the proofs of the conspiracy are
drawn from their writings.^®

The Abbe quoted Voltaire as saying: "I am weary of hearing
people repeat that twelve men have been sufficient to establish
Christianity, and I will prove that one man may suffice to overthrow
it."^^

The French historian noted that the principal Encyclopedists had a
secret language and, in that connection, he cited a letter from Voltaire

31

to D'Alembert in which it is stated: "The vine of truth is well
cultivated." Translated, the statement means: "We make amazing
progress against religion.

Masonic sources, it should be noted, frequently have pointed out
that most of the major actors among the Encyclopedists were
Masons.in that regard, Robison and Barruel are cited rather
extensively in the following paragraphs, in order to establish that what
was attested to of Masonry in Europe in the 18th Century has been
confirmed by Masonic sources as a substantially accurate
representation of Freemasonry in America and Europe in the 20th
Century.

Barruel said he was invited to become a member of the lower
grades of Masonry, and consented to take the first two degrees, which
were given to him outright and in a humorous vein.

However, the third degree ritual demanded unswerving obedience
to the orders of the Grand Master, even though those orders might be
contrary to the King, or any other sovereign. Despite not agreeing to
so bind himself, Barruel received the degree of Master Mason.

Those admitted to the first three degrees of Masonry, he explained,
learn that Masonic and Christian eras do not coincide. For the Mason,
the Year of Light begins at Creation, thus antedating Moses, the
Prophets and Jesus Christ.^^

He noted that many beliefs of Masonry are quite similar to the
beliefs and practices of the Manichees, such as the "follies" of the
Kabbalah and magic; indifference to all religion; the same terrible
oaths; and symbols of sun, moon and stars used inside the lodges.^®

The French cleric described his own initiation and its attendant
ceremonies and oaths. His account confirms that the Craft's degree
and initiatory ceremonies of 1798 are almost identical to the
Fraternity's practices today.^^

He said his own initiation gave him sufficient credibility to
converse with those whom he knew to be more advanced in Masonry,
"and in many of these interviews it happened, that, notwithstanding all
their secrecy, some unguarded expressions escaped the most zealous
adepts, which threw light on the subject." Other Masons, he continued,
lent him their books, "presuming that their obscureness and the want
of essential words, or the method of discovering them, would baffle all
my attempts to understand them.

With such understanding, he was able to learn about the degree of
Knight of the Rose Cross, or "the Rosicrucians." The ornaments of the
Lodge in that degree recall to the candidate "the solemn Mystery of

32

Mount Calvary."

The Lodge room was draped in black with an altar prominently
displayed, above which were three crosses. The middle one bore the
inscription: "l.N.R.l."

"The brethren in sacerdotal vestments are seated on the ground in
the most profound silence, resting their heads on their arms to
represent their grief," Barruel wrote.

But, he said, it was "not the death of the Son of God, who died
victim of our sins, that was the cause of their affliction." Rather, it was
Christ's Crucifixion and the establishment of Christianity which
moved the brethren to mourn loss of "the word, that is [their]
pretended natural Religion . . ., " which dates from that sacred Day.

This was evidenced in the ceremony, the Abbe said, by the
response of the Senior Warden when he is asked the time of day by
the Master of the Lodge. The Warden replied:

"it is the first hour of the day, the time when the veil of the
temple was rent asunder, when darkness and consternation
was spread over the earth, when the light was darkened, when
the implements of Masonry were broken, when the flaming
star disappeared, when the cubic stone was broken, when the
word was lost."^®

Those revelations about the philosophy and activities of
Freemasonry were no less sensational than were the disclosures of
Barruel and Robison regarding the Bavarian Order of Illuminati. The
Order was a secret society founded by Professor Adam Weishaupt of
Ingolstadt, Germany, and records show it was closely intwined with
Masonry. Members of the Order, Barruel found, were the secret
Masters of Masonry.^®

Knowledge of the Order became public during search of a house
occupied by one of the leaders, as well as by communications
discovered at the Castle of Sandersdorf, a meeting place of the group.
Other information was made known by an unidentified spy within the
Order, and by depositions given by four professors of the Marianen
Academy in Bavaria, who were members of the organization.

Weishaupt held views which, in later years, were echoed by the
founding philosophers and adepts of international Communism, as
well as others. Weishaupt proclaimed:

"Liberty and Equality are the essential rights that man in
his original and primitive perfection received from nature.
Property struck the first blow at Equality; political society or

33

Governments were the first dispossessors of Liberty: the
supporters of Governments and Property are the religious and
civil laws; therefore, to reinstate man in his primitive rights of
Equality and Liberty, we must begin by destroying all
Religion, all civil society and finish by the destruction of all
Property.

According to Barruel, the doctrines of llluminism came to Europe
from Egypt through a Jutland merchant.^^

Although Weishaupt hated religion, above all the Catholic Church,
he greatly admired the effectiveness of her religious orders--
particularly the Jesuits--in spreading the Gospel throughout the world.
"What these men have done for the altar and throne, why should 1 not
do in opposition to the altar and throne," the Bavarian professor
remarked.

Robison, referring to testimony of the four Marianen Academy
professors, said the Order of Illuminati abjured Christianity; promoted
sensual pleasures; considered suicide Justifiable; viewed patriotism
and loyalty to country as narrow-minded prejudices incompatible with
universal benevolence; held private property a hindrance to
happiness; and insisted that the goals of the Order were superior to all
else.^"^

Also, he observed, members of the Order could be found only in
the Lodges of Masonry.^^

The Edinburg scholar said members of the group "insinuated
themselves into all public offices, and particularly into the courts of
Justice."^®

Weishaupt told his followers: "We must win the common people in
every corner. This will be obtained chiefly by means of the schools,
and by open, hearty behavior. Show condescension, popularity, and
toleration of their prejudices, which we at leisure shall root out and
dispel.

Continuing in the same vein, he said: "If a writer publishes
anything that attracts notice, and is in itself Just but does not accord
with our plan, we must endeavor to win him over--or decry him."^®
The strength of the Order of Illuminati, he said, lies in its
concealment; let it never appear in any place in its own name, but
always covered by another name and another occupation. None is
fitter than the three lower degrees of Freemasonry . . .

In addition to Masonry as a cover for Illuminati activities,
Weishaupt recommended that members of the Order find
concealment in "a learned or literary society" which "may be a

34

powerful engine in our hands.

He taught his followers to try to obtain influence in all offices
which have any effect in "forming or in managing, or even in directing
the mind of man . . .

All members of the Order, he said, "must be assisted . . . [and]
preferred to all persons otherwise of equal merit.

The organization believed that Jesus established no new religion,
but only "set religion and reason in their ancient rights.

Using the arcane language of llluminism to explain his views on
social conditions and the remedy for shaping society in the Order's
mold, Weishaupt, in a letter to a colleague, referred to a "rough, split,
and polished stone." The differences were explained by
characterizing the rough and split stones as man's condition under
civil government: "rough by ever fretting inequality of condition; and
split since we are no longer one family, and are further divided by
differences of government, rank, property and religion." However,
when these differences are eliminated, and peoples of the world are
"reunited in one family, we are represented by the polished stone.

"Examine, read, think," Weishaupt admonished his devotees as he
urged them to understand symbols and symbolic language used by
the Order. Explaining, he instructed his followers: "There are many
things which one cannot find out without a guide, nor ever learn
without instructions . . .Your Superiors . . . know the true path--but will
not point it out. Enough if they assist you in every approach to it."'^^
Thus, the need for the membership at large to "examine, read, think."

The new llluminee was "particularly recommended to study the
doctrine of the ancient Gnostics and Manichaeans, which may lead
him to many important discoveries on the real Masonry."''^®

The Illuminati, Robison said, hoped to use women by hinting of
their "emancipation from the tyranny of public opinion.

The great aim of the Order, said the Scotch scholar, "is to make
men happy," by "making them good." This was to be accomplished
by "enlightening the mind, and freeing it from the dominion of
superstition and prejudice."'^®

Robison also observed that Weishaupt was firm in the conviction
that the Ancient Mysteries "were useful to mankind, containing
rational doctrines of natural religion."''^®

Professor Renner, one of the Marianen Academy scholars who
gave a written deposition about his knowledge of the Illuminati, said
the Order bound adepts by subduing their minds "with the most
magnificent promises, and assure . . .the protection of great

35

personages ready to do everything for the advancement of its
members at the recommendation of the Order.

The Order enticed into its lodges only those who could be useful:
"Statesmen, . . .counsellors, secretaries . . .professors, abbes,
preceptors, physicians, and apothecaries are always welcome
candidates to the Order."^^

According to a joint deposition signed by Professor Renner and his
three colleagues, the object of the first degrees of Illuminism was to
train the adepts in the system of espionage. Once the member had so
committed himself to such nefarious acts of espionage, treason, or
other treacherous enterprises, he remained in a state of perpetual
dread, fearing his superiors might at some time reveal the criminal
activity, the four academicians testified.

The revelations of Robison and Barruel caused a sensation, not
only in Europe, but in America, and were synopsized in newspapers
and recommended for reading.

On December 4, 1794, The Herald of New York editorialized on
the history of the French Revolution, and said that history was the
history of "the Popular Societies, the principal moving springs of
action during the whole revolution." The editorial urged owners of
newspapers in the new nation to make the history of those societies
known, and recommended the works of Barruel and Robison.

Further evidence of the popularity of the works of Barruel and
Robison in America was indicated when a Protestant minister, G.W.
Snyder of Frederick, Maryland, sent to President George Washington
a copy of Robison's book, with a covering letter. He said the President
should be familiar with many of the points made by the Scottish
scholar, since Mr. Washington was himself a Mason.

The President responded by noting that he never had presided
over any Masonic Lodge, and had visited such establishments very
seldom. Further, he observed, he did not believe the Lodges in the
CJnited States were "contaminated" with the principles of Illuminism.

In a follow-up letter to Rev. Snyder, the President elaborated on his
position and conceded that the doctrines of the Illuminati and
Jacobins had indeed spread to the CJnited States. No one, Mr.
Washington said, "is more truly satisfied of this fact than 1 am."

Continuing, he said: " . . .1 did not believe that the Lodges of
Freemasons in this country had, as societies, endeavored to
propagate the diabolical tenets of the first [the Illuminati], or the
pernicious principles of the latter [Jacobins] (if they are susceptible of
separation). That individuals of them [Masonic Lodges] may have
done it, or that the founder or instrument employed to found the

36

Democratic Societies in the CJnited States, may have had these
objects; and actually had a separation of the People from their
Government in view, is too evident to be questioned.

Freemasonry In Early America

The first Lodge of Freemasonry in America was established at
Philadelphia in 1730, and claimed Benjamin Franklin as a member.
Indeed, many leaders of the American Revolution, including
Washington, were members of the Craft.^® That is not surprising,
since many of them also were Deists, the forerunner to modern day
Gnitarianism.

Historian Paul Hazard observed that Deists believed there "must
be no form of constraint." They found no need for priests, ministers,
nor rabbis. No more sacraments, rites, nor ceremonies; no more
fasting, mortifying the flesh; no more going to church or synagogue.
The Bible, to Deists, was a book just like any other.^^

Deism, said Hazard, became devoted to the law of nature and free
thinking; and upon the heels of Deism and Natural Religion came
Freemasonry.^®

Actually, Masons were most active in bringing about the
Revolutionary War in America, according to the New Age. A 1940
editorial in that publication declared: "It was the Masons who brought
on the war, and it was Masonic generals who carried it through to a
successful conclusion. In fact, the famous Boston Tea Party, which
precipitated the war, was actually a recessed meeting of a Masonic
Lodge.

French historian Bernard Fay, writing of the Boston Tea Party, said
the incident emanated from a tavern known as the "Green Dragon or
the Arms of Freemasonry." A shabby band of "Redskins" were seen to
leave the tavern on the afternoon of December 16, 1773, although no
such persons had been seen to enter the building.

The group, reported Fay, rushed to the docks, jumped onto the
ships anchored there, and threw tea into the harbor. The "Redskins"
returned to the Green Dragon, but were never seen to leave.®®

Fay also said Benjamin Franklin established a "network of
Masonic newspapers" in all the English colonies, one of the most
prominent of which was Peter Zenger's Journal in New York.®^

Franklin, Fay wrote, utilized French Freemasons to aid the
American Revolution. The American Revolutionary activist
ingratiated himself to the widow of Claude Adrien Helvetius, the

37

wealthy Encyclopedist, banker and atheist, who helped found the
Lodge of Nine Muses--the intellectual center of French Freemasonry.

Through Madame Helvetius, Franklin was admitted to the Nine
Muses and became Master of the Lodge. There he devoted himself to
a propaganda campaign which swung French public opinion in favor
of the American Masonic cause. Franklin's "admirable work," said
Fay, was the most carefully planned and most efficiently organized
propaganda ever accomplished, and "made possible the military
intervention of France on the side of the Americans."®^

Moreover, he asserted, Franklin's work also had "a great
intellectual influence throughout Europe, spreading the idea, or what
might be called the myth, of virtuous revolution." Op until that time,
the French historian said, revolutions had been viewed "as crimes
against society." Subsequently, revolutions "were accepted as a step
in progress of the world," a step and a perception which "originated
with the American Revolution and grew out of Franklin's
propaganda."®^

Legislatures Investigate G.S. Masonry

Despite the fact that Masonry had been active in America since
1730, it was not until disclosures in "The Morgan Affair," almost 100
years later, that the American people became acutely aware of the
Fraternity's "secret work."

When the public heard that one William Morgan, a Mason of
Batavia, New York, allegedly had been murdered by members of the
Craft for disclosing its secrets, the outcry was so vehement and
widespread that thousands of the brethren resigned from the
Fraternity. Legislatures of the States of New York, Massachusetts and
Pennsylvania initiated investigations into the secret operations of
Freemasonry, and developed testimony which was both amazing and
frightening. The purportedly benevolent Fraternity was revealed to be
a state within a state and one that bound its adherents with the most
gruesome and terrifying oaths. In the national elections of 1830, the
anti-Masonic political party mustered 130,000 votes.

The report of the New York State Senate Committee said of
Freemasonry:

"It comprises men of rank, wealth, office and talents in
power--and that almost in every place where power is of any
importance--it comprises, among the other classes of the

38

community, to the lowest, in large numbers, and capable of
being directed by the efforts of others so as to have the force
of concert through the civilized world!

"They are distributed too, with the means of knowing each
other, and the means of keeping secret, and the means of
cooperating, in the desk, in the legislative hall, on the bench,
in every gathering of men of business, in every party of
pleasure, in every enterprise of government, in every
domestic circle, in peace and in war, among its enemies and
friends, in one place as well as another. So powerful, indeed,
is it at this time, that it fears nothing from violence, either
public or private, for it has every means to learn it in season,
to counteract, defeat and punish it. . .

The report noted that there were approximately 30,000
Freemasons in the State of New York--about one-fourth of the eligible
voting population--"yet they have held for forty years, three-fourths"
of all public offices in the State.

Commenting on a situation which has perdured through the years,
the report addressed the attitude of the press, as follows:

"The public press, that mighty engine for good or for evil,
has been, with a few honorable exceptions, silent as the
grave. This self-proclaimed sentinel of freedom, has felt the
force of masonic influence, or has been smitten with the rod of
its power."®®

The New York legislators said Masonic witnesses on the stand
"have sworn to facts, which in the opinion of bystanders, were not
credited by a single one of the hundreds of persons who were
present." Moreover, grand juries, "a majority of whom were masons,"
omitted to find bills of indictment "when there was proof before them
of outrages not surpassed in grossness and indecency by any
committed in the country since the first settlement."®^

The committee also disclosed some of the oaths taken by
Freemasons testified to by former Masons who recently had resigned
from the Fraternity. Those providing such testimony were "personally
known to a majority of the committee" as "men of standing in the
community, whose characters for veracity are beyond reach of
calumny."®®

Penalties accepted by Masons in the first three degrees were:

39

Entered Apprentice: "To have his throat cut across, his
tongue taken out by the roots, and his body buried in the
ocean."

Fellow Craft: "To have his left breast torn open, his heart
and vitals taken from thence, and thrown over his left
shoulder, and carried to the Valley of Jehosaphat, there to
become a prey to the wild beasts of the field and the vultures
of the air."

Master Mason: "To have his body severed in two in the
midst and divided to the north and south, his bowels burnt to
ashes in the center, and the ashes scattered to the four winds
of heaven."

Royal Arch: "To have his skull struck off, and his brains
exposed to the scorching rays of a meridian sun."®®

Much of the same information uncovered by the New York Senate
in 1829, also was found five years later to be common in the State of
Massachusetts, when a Joint Committee of the legislature of the latter
State investigated the Craft.

Masons invited to appear before the Joint Committee refused to do
so, and though the Massachusetts House approved subpoena power
for the committee, the State Senate refused to do so.^®

The committee found Freemasonry was "a distinct Independent
Government within our own Government, and beyond the control of
the laws of the land by means of its secrecy, and the oaths and
regulations which its subjects are bound to obey, under penalties of
death." The committee added that "in no Masonic oath presented to
the committee, is there any reservation made of the Constitution and
the laws of the land."^^

The Joint Committee found Freemasonry to be a "moral evil," a
"pecuniary evil," and a "political evil."^^

In 1836, a committee of the House of Representatives of the State
of Pennsylvania was provided additional testimony which largely
confirmed what the legislatures of the two other States had learned
about Freemasonry.

The Pennsylvania panel was informed that a Master Mason
promises under oath to protect the secrets of a brother Master Mason,
"murder and treason only excepted, and those at my own option.

In all, nineteen witnesses refused to provide sworn testimony to
the committee. Other witnesses informed the legislators that Masons
influence judicial decisions and consider Masonic oaths superior to
all other oaths.

40

Other Early Activities Of G.S. Masonry

But the State legislative committees never learned of numerous
other activities of Masonry, which remained virtually unknown to the
public at large.

For example, members of the Craft overthrew the Spanish
government of Baton Rouge, Louisiana in 1810 and ran up their own
flag, a lone silver star on a field of blue, to establish their "newly
created Republic of West Florida." The star represented the "five
points of fellowship" under which the ringleaders of the rebellion held
their meetings.

The Grand Lodge of Louisiana and its federated lodges plotted
revolution in Mexico, and the Scottish lodges entered Mexico in 1813
for the express purpose of introducing the Constitution of Cadiz, a
revolutionary statement of governing principles which contained
numerous anti-ecclesiastical provisions.^®

Moreover, public officials in the Clnited States were active in
pressing Masonry upon the Mexican people. New York Governor
Dewitt Clinton, in a letter dated December 10, 1825, acting in his
Masonic role as General Grand High Priest of the Royal Arch Masons
in the Clnited States, approved the request of Joel Poinsett to establish
a chapter of the Royal Arch in Mexico. The letter further authorized
Poinsett to establish other chapters of that discipline in South
America. Poinsett, at that time, was the Cl.S. minister plenipotentiary
to that country.

in 1835, Stephen Austin met in New Orleans "with 35 prominent
members of the local Lodge of Freemasons, and planned the
campaign which liberated Texas from Mexican rule."^®

Also, the Grand Lodges of Louisiana and Pennsylvania were busy
chartering Masonic lodges in Mexico, and Poinsett used his
considerable influence to have the Grand Lodge of New York charter
the Grand Lodge of Mexico. The Mexican lodges virtually became the
ruling political party of Mexico in the early 19th century.^®

But it is a strange irony of history that, despite the growing
national awareness of Freemasonry's grave threat to Judeo-Christian
beliefs and values--and to government itself--the American people
allowed their attention to be diverted suddenly by a deceptive
concern for what was perceived as a greater and more immediate
menace: the Roman Catholic Church.

Before exploring that aspect of American history, it is important to
understand the underlying philosophy of the Masonic Fraternity and
the actions which flow from such belief.

41

2/ THE MIND OF MASONRY

Earlier in this century, Father Hermann Gruber, S.J., a recognized
authority on Freemasonry, carefully scrutinized the Masonic Fraternity
on the basis of its numerous publications and reports. He found:

* The Masonic program coincides to an astonishing degree with
the program of the French Revolution of 1789.^

* The Craft fosters in its members, and through them in society at
large, the spirit of innovation, it furnishes in critical times a shelter for
conspiracy.^

* Freemasonry propagates principles which, logically developed,
are essentially revolutionary and serve as a basis for all kinds of
revolutionary movements.^

* The Scottish Rite system, which is propagated throughout the
world, "may be considered as the revolutionary type of French
Templar Masonry, fighting for the natural rights of man against
religious and political despotism symbolized by the papal tiara and
the royal crown.

* Treason and rebellion against civil authority are deemed only
political crimes which do not affect the good standing of a Mason, nor
do they result in the imposition of Masonic punishment.^

* Symbolic formulae and symbols are used so the work of
Masonry may not be hindered. The symbol of the Great Architect of
the CJniverse and of the Bible are of the utmost importance to
Masonry, since symbols are explained and accepted by each Mason
according to his own understanding. The official organ of Italian
Masonry emphasized that the Grand Architect may represent the
revolutionary God of Mazzini, the Satan of Carducci, God as the
fountain of love, or Satan the genius of the good, not of the bad. in
reality, Italian Masonry, in these interpretations, adores the principle of
Revolution.®

The ultimate aim of the Craft, Fr. Gruber said, is the overthrow of
all spiritual and political "tyranny" and class privileges, so that there
will be established a universal social republic in which will reign the
greatest possible individual liberty and social and economic
equality.^

42

To accomplish their goal, Masons believe the following is
necessary:

1. The destruction of all social influence by the Church
and religion generally, either by open persecution or by so-
called separation of Church and State.

2. To laicize or secularize all public and private life and,
above all, popular education.

3. To systematically develop freedom of thought and
conscience in school children, and protect them, so far as
possible, against all disturbing influences of the Church, and
even their own parents--by compulsion if necessary.®

Fr. Gruber's study was written in 1913, but it is curiously evident
that much of the Masonic program he outlined became manifest to the
general public during the three decades Freemasons dominated the
Cl.S. Supreme Court.

Certainly, the high bench has been militant in insisting that the
First Amendment mandates a scrupulous "separation of Church and
State." in that connection, the Court has said repeatedly that
governmental funds can be provided only for education and related
activities which are completely non-sectarian.

Surely, the Justices' approval for dispensing contraceptives to
children without parental consent, and authorizing them to have
abortions without the same consent, parallels Fr. Gruber's third point
immediately above.

Of course, some may wish to dismiss the Jesuit's catalogue of
Masonic chicanery as the views of an obedient priest written to affirm
earlier findings of Popes, historians, and legislative investigating
committees influenced by Christian values.

But the priest's analysis of the Craft cannot be cavalierly ignored,
particularly in view of the unexpected tribute paid him by a prominent
Masonic historian, Ossian Lang, in a report to the Grand Lodge of New
York. Lang said: "A fine example of how the analytic mind of a
scholarly non-Mason may discern the truth, may be found in the
excellent article on Freemasonry contained in The Catholic
Encyclopedia. The author of that article comes nearer to interpreting
the history correctly of Freemasonry . . .than any Masonic writer
whose publications have appeared in the English language . . . ."®'^

A View From The Lodge

43

Actually, Fr. Gruber's study, as well as the findings of Popes,
historians and legislative committees, have been largely confirmed
by members of the Craft itself. The fact is, a perusal of sixty years of
writings in the authoritative New Age magazine leaves no doubt that
Fr. Gruber and others of unimpeachable veracity have clearly
explained the reality of the Masonic conspiracy to destroy Christian
civilization.

A review of nearly two-thirds of a century of the official monthly
journal of the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry of the Southern
Jurisdiction--the rite to which so many Presidents of the CJnited
States, Justices of the Supreme Court and Members of Congress
adhered--leaves one impressed by the consistent emphasis writers
have given over the years to Albert Pike's Morals and Dogma, a book
written in 1871 as a series of lectures, "specially intended to be read
and studied by the Brethren of that obedience in connection with the
Rituals and of the Degrees . . .

Pike's 861-page tome is described as "the basis for Masonic
philosophy," and is given to each initiate into the Fourth Degree.^ ^
Moreover, the book has been viewed by the Brethren as "a secret
book . . .not for publication, in case a mason dies or otherwise leaves
the Council, the book should be returned to the Supreme Council or
else destroyed.

Certainly, such statements serve to convince the reader that
Pike's book is a document of the highest importance to Scottish Rite
Freemasonry. Indeed, it appears to be the very mind of Masonry.

The Introduction to the work says the author was "about equally
author and compiler; since he has extracted quite half its contents"
from others. Moreover, it is explained that Pike changed and remolded
sentences of others, and added his own words and phrases to the
statements of writers in order to "use them as if they were his own . . .
m13

The official historian of the Scottish Rite of the Southern
Jurisdiction, Charles Lobinger, said Pike's book "swarms with
citations from Eliphas Levi," author of Dogme et Rituel, and that
Morals and Dogma "is shown to be literal and verbatim extractions
from those of the French Magus.

Arthur Waite, a Masonic authority on, and translator of, Levi's
works, has written:

"No person who is acquainted with Morals and Dogma can

fail to trace the hand of the occultist therein and it is to be

especially observed that, passing from grade to grade in the

44

direction of the highest, this institution [Freemasonry]

becomes more and more Kabbalistic."^^

Another Masonic writer insisted that reading Pike's work makes
one feel "he is contacting one of the greatest minds," and that some
day Pike will be recognized "as one of the greatest religious teachers
and reformers of history . . .

Another author, writing in the same publication, recognized Pike's
book to be "tedious reading and even difficult to understand." He
suggested that the volume be read slowly over a three-year period.

Continuing, the latter writer said the book is "a summation of those
philosophic and religious truths which are presented so graphically in
the [degree] work," and he urged the study of Gnosticism and the
Kabbalah as collateral reading.

So it is made clear that Freemasonry is not fundamentally a
fraternal insurance organization. It is an occult religion of Kabbalistic
Gnosticism, and Pike's book is the basic source document for
brainwashing men in all degrees of Scottish Rite Masonry.

Pike's Morals and Dogma

Scottish Rite Masonry's Grand Philosopher and former Grand
Commander wrote that the people, as a mass, are a "blind force,"
which must be "economized and managed" in order to attack
"superstitions, despotism and prejudice."^® And once the people are
organized and guided by "a brain and a law," and motivated by Truth
and Love, "the great revolution prepared for by the ages will begin to
march."

He said the force of the people becomes exhausted by prolonging
"things long since dead; in governing mankind by embalming old,
dead tyrannies of Faith; restoring dilapidated dogmas; re-gilding
faded, worm-eaten shrines; whitening and rouging ancient and barren
superstitions . . .perpetuating superannuated institutions; enforcing the
worship of symbols as the actual means of salvation; and tying the
dead corpse of the Past. . .with the living present."^®

Pike compared the unorganized mass of people to a "Rough
Ashlar" (building stone), and the organized and direct masses to a
"Perfect Ashlar." It is a concept that had been first enunciated by
Adam Weishaupt to guide his Bavarian Illuminati, as was noted earlier
in the preceding pages of the book the reader is now perusing.^ ^

The Masonic leader identified Masonry with the Ancient Mysteries

45

and star worship. The sun, moon and Master of the Lodge, he said, are
the three sublime lights of Masonry. He characterized the Sun as the
ancient symbol of the life-giving and generative power of the Deity.
The Moon symbolizes the passive capacity of nature to produce (that
is, the female of the species). The Master of Life "was" (emphasis
added) the Supreme Diety, above both and manifested through both.

The Sun represents actual light, pours its fecunding rays upon the
Moon, and both shed their light upon their offspring, the Blazing Star of
Horus. The three form a great equilateral triangle in the center of
which is the monific letter of the Kabbalah, by which creation is said
to have been effected.

In addition to exciting interest among neophyte Masons in pagan
religions (which had been almost abandoned with the triumph of
Christianity in the Fourth Century, A.D.), Pike's book also presents
Masonry as an organization which thrives on tension, conflict and
revolution--a struggle apparently directed toward what Pike called
"the great revolution prepared for by the ages," which would usher in
the "universal social republic" mentioned by Fr. Gruber.^^

Lectures based on Pike's philosophy should immediately impress
perceptive Masons that the tension, conflict and revolution referred to
is the age-old pagan conflict with Christianity--particularly the Roman
Catholic Church. The alternating black and white squares on the
Lodge floor. Pike noted, serve to remind all Masons of that constant
conflict. Those alternating blocks symbolize, he said, the "warfare of
Michael and Satan; between light and darkness; freedom and
despotism; religious liberty and the arbitrary dogmas of a Church that
thinks for its votaries, and whose Pontiff claims to be infallible, and
the decretals of its Councils to constitute gospel." Freemasonry, Pike
said, owes its "success to opposition.

Pike made it abundantly evident that Masonry has nothing to do
with Old and New Testament religious values. The Craft, he insisted,
is the successor of the Ancient Mysteries, and teaches and preserves
the cardinal tenets of the old primitive faith.All old religions "have
died away and old faiths faded into oblivion," but Masonry, he claims,
survives "teaching the same old truths as the Essenes taught and as
John the Baptist preached in the desert."^®

Masonry's "same old truths" were gathered "from the Zend-Avesta
and the Vedas, from Plato and Pythagoras, from India, Persia,
Phoenicia, Greece, Egypt and the Holy Books of the Jews . . .These
doctrines are the religion and philosophy of Masonry."^^ Obviously,
Masonic philosophy makes no room for Christian truths, ethics and
values. (See infra, p. 238 f.).

46

Elaborating on Masonic philosophy, Pike said that while Christian
Masons may believe the Divine Word became Man, others believe the
same thing happened long before to Mithra and Osiris. Therefore,
Christians should not object if others see in the Word of St. John what
actually is the Logos of Plato or the CJnuttered Thought of the first
emanation of light or the Perfect Reason. "We do not admit that the
Messiah was born in Bethlehem."^®

The "truths" spread by Masonry, Pike wrote, are based on Jewish
mystical lore known as Kabbalistic Gnosticism (see infra, n. 34, 47),
which was passed to Masonry through the Knights Templar.

Explaining, Pike said there existed at the time of the Templars a
sect of "Johannite Christians, who claimed to be the only true initiates
into the real mysteries" of the religion of Christ. Adopting in part the
Jewish traditions and tales of the Talmud, they said facts recounted in
the Gospels "are but allegories."^®

The Knights Templar, he continued, were from the very beginning
"devoted to . . .opposition to the tiara of Rome and the crown of its
Chiefs . . .

The object of the Templars, he said, was to acquire influence and
wealth, then to "intrigue and at need fight to establish the Johannite or
Gnostic and Kabbalistic dogma . . .

Again identifying Freemasonry with the Knights Templar, Pike
declared: "The Papacy and rival monarchies . . .are sold and bought
in these days, become corrupt, and tomorrow, perhaps, will destroy
each other. All that will become the heritage of the Temple: the World
will soon come to us for its Sovereigns and Pontiffs. We shall
constitute the equilibrium of the universe, and be rulers over the
masters of the world.

He said the Templars, like other secret societies, had two
doctrines: One was concealed and reserved for the Masters, which
was Johannism; the other, publicly practiced, was Roman
Catholicism. Thus, Freemasonry, he said, "vulgarly imagined to have
begun with the Dionysian Architects or German Stone-workers,
adopted St. John the Evangelist as one of its patrons, associating with
him in order not to arouse the suspicion of Rome . . .[and] thus
covertly proclaiming itself the child of the Kabbalah and Essenism
together."®®

The Johannism of the Adepts, he added, "was the Kabbalah of the
earlier Gnostics."®'^

Referring to the trial of the Templars (which lasted from 1307 to
1314, and involved charges that Templars denied Christ was God,
abjured other basic Catholic beliefs, including the Sacraments, spat

47

and urinated upon the Crucifix, and regularly engaged in
homosexuality and other obscene acts^^), Pike said: Pope Clement V
and Philip the Fair (of France) could not fully explain to the people at
large "the conspiracy of the Templars against the Thrones and the
Tiara. To do so would propagate the religion of Isis."^®

Jacques De Molay, Grand Master of the Knights Templar, was
executed in 1314. However, before he died, according to Pike, he
instituted what came to be called the occult Hermetic or Scottish
Masonry, the Lodges of which were established in four metropolitan
areas, Naples, Edinburg, Stockholm, and Paris. These Lodges, Pike
asserted, were the initial Lodges of modern Freemasonry.^^

The former Grand Commander of the Scottish Rite also asserted
that the secret movers of the French Revolution had sworn upon the
tomb of De Molay to overthrow Throne and Altar. Then, when King
Louis XVI of France was executed (1793), "half the work was done;
thenceforward, the Army of the Temple was to direct all its efforts
against the Pope."^®

The Church and Christianity are clearly the major enemies of
Pike's Freemasonry. Christianity, he said, taught the doctrine of
Fraternity, but repudiated that of political equality because it
inculcated obedience to Caesar and to those lawfully in authority.®^
According to Pike, the Samaritan Jews, using Kabbalistic data,
characterized the "vulgar faith" by the figure of Thartac, a god
represented with a book, a clock, and the head of an ass. This was
because they believed Christianity was under the reign of Thartac,
since its adherents preferred "blind faith and utter credulity . . .to
intelligence and science.'"'^®

Concerning Heaven and Hell, Pike wrote: "The present is
Masonry's scene of action--man is on earth to live, to enjoy. He is not
in this world to hanker after another.

"The unseen cannot hold a higher place in our affections than the
seen," he declared, and added: Only those "who have a deep
affection for this world will work for its amelioration."'^^

Asceticism, said Pike, is "unnatural" and "moribund." Those
whose affections are transferred to Heaven, easily acquiesce in the
miseries of earth. "Those given most decidedly to spiritual
contemplation, and [who] make religion rule their life are most
apathetic toward improving this world's systems. They are
conservators of evil and hostile to political and social reform.

The writings of the Apostles, Pike said, were only "articles of the
vulgar faith." The real mysteries of knowledge handed down from
generation to generation by superior minds were the teachings of the

48

Gnostics., "and in them [we find] some of the ideas that form part of
Masonry.

To Pike, Christ was not unique. The fundamental teachings
concerning Jesus are commonly believed of Krishna, the Hindu
Redeemer, he said. Born of a virgin, performing miracles, raising
people from the dead, Krishna descended into Hell, rose again,
ascended into Heaven, charged his disciples to teach doctrines and
gave them a gift of miracles.

Speaking of the Catholic Church, Pike wrote: "By what right . . .
does the savage, merciless, persecuting animal endeavor to delude
itself that it is not an animal?"^^

In his commentary on the Council of Kadosh, Pike inferentially
referred to the Holy Eucharist, and said:

The chief symbol of man's ultimate redemption is the fraternal
supper of bread and wine. This fraternal meal teaches, among other
things, "that many thousands who died before us might claim to be
joint owners with ourselves of the particles that compose our mortal
bodies, for matter ever forms new combinations: and the bodies of the
ancient dead, the Patriarchs before and since the Flood, the Kings and
common people of all ages, resolved into their constituent elements,
are carried upon the wind over all continents, and continually enter
into and form part of the habitations of new souls creating new bonds
of sympathy and brotherhood between each man that lives and all his
race.

"And thus the bread we eat, and the wine we drink tonight may
enter into and form part of us the identical particles of matter that
once formed parts of the material bodies called Moses, Confucius,
Plato, Socrates, or Jesus of Nazareth. In the truest sense, we eat and
drink the bodies of the dead . . .

Over and over again. Morals and Dogma (MAD) emphasizes that
Freemasonry is a religion based on the occult Jewish philosophy
found in the Kabbalah.

The key to the true meaning of the symbols within the Temple is
found in the occult philosophy of the Kabbalah, Pike said, and
subsequently asserted that Masonry owes all its symbols and secrets
to the Kabbalah.'^^

"It is the province of Masonry to teach all truths, not moral truth
alone, but political and philosophical, and even religious truth," he
said.''^® Masonry, he insisted, is "the universal morality.""^®

And again: "The religious faith . . . taught by Masonry is
indispensable to the attainment of the great ends of life . . . Pike
proclaimed that "every Masonic Lodge is a temple of religion; and its

49

teachings are instruction in religion . . .

The degree Rose Cross teaches "the ultimate defeat and
extinction of evil and wrong and sorrow by a Redeemer or Messiah yet
to come, if he has not already appeared.

Earlier commentators on Masonry have contended that Masonry
is a state within the State. Morals and Dogma gives credence to that
view by insisting that Masonry determines whether heads of State
should stay in power.

"Edicts by a despotic power, contrary to the Law of God or the
Great Law" of Nature, destructive of the inherent rights of man, and
violative of the right of free thought, free speech, free conscience
warrant lawful rebellion, he said.^^ And, he noted that "resistance to
power usurped is not merely a duty which man owes to himself and
his neighbor, but a duty which he owes to his God."^”^

If rulers have the Divine Right to govern, the true Masonic initiate
will cheerfully obey, said Pike.^^

The problem faced by both rulers and people is to know who has a
"Divine Right" to govern, and how much freedom is permitted for
speech and conscience in a state before rebellion is warranted.
Morals and Dogma strongly indicates that Masonry alone will make
such determinations.

Pike also makes clear that those in the lower degrees of Masonry
are "intentionally misled by false interpretations" of the symbols of
the Craft. "It is not intended," he said, that Masons in the Blue Degrees
(the first three degrees) "shall understand them; but it is intended that
[they] shall imagine" they do. The true explanations of the symbols
are "reserved for the Adepts, the Princes of Masonry," he said.^®

Those are some highlights from a book that has been extolled in
the New Age magazine for over 60 years as the philosophic
foundation upon which Scottish Rite Freemasonry stands. While many
members of the Fraternity have found the book turgid and tedious,
obviously many others look upon it as a great source of wisdom. In
January, 1950, the Scottish Rite Committee on Publications reminded
members of the Craft that they were "expected to be leaders and
teachers of the people," and that the basic philosophy undergirding
their efforts must be Morals and Dogma.

It can be little doubted that Pike had the pulse of Masonry. And
long prior to publication of his opus (1871), the Supreme Council of
the Scottish Rite of the Southern Jurisdiction issued a circular
asserting: "Above the idea of country is the idea of humanity."^®

A Mason has written that Masonry exists the world over "and is

50

susceptible of forming, at any moment, with its various Masonries, a
homogenous bloc, or mass, pursuing a common ideal. That ideal is
the emancipation of Humanity.

One well-informed non-Masonic student of the Craft said that to
promote the Masonic concept of "the welfare of humanity" and
elimination of "ignorance and prejudice" meant in practical terms
Masonic attacks on altar and throne.®®

The same source also said the true purpose of Freemasonry is
"the fall of all dogmas and the ruin of all churches."®^

The Grand Commander of Scottish Rite Masonry of the Southern
Jurisdiction revealed that Manuel Quezon, first President of the
Philippine Senate and later the first President of the Philippine
Commonwealth, declined to accept the "rank and dignity" of the 33rd
degree of Freemasonry, because he "feared, some way, sometime,
that there might be some obligation in accepting the honor which
would be in conflict with his allegiance to the Philippines."®^

Albert Pike

The only monument to a Confederate general in the nation's
capital stands on public property between the CJ.S. Department of
Labor Building and the city's Municipal Building on D Street, N.W.,
between Third and Fourth Streets, it is a statue of Albert Pike, the
grand philosopher of Scottish Rite Masonry, who was indicted for
treason for his activities during the Civil War.

Clad in a frock coat and weskit, wearing shoulder-length hair, the
bewhiskered Pike is depicted holding in his left hand a volume of
Morals and Dogma, his great Masonic treatise.

Chiseled into the statue's pedestal are words which purport to
describe the man's abilities: poet, author, jurist, orator, philosopher,
philanthropist, scholar and soldier. The sculpture gives no indication
that Pike, as a Confederate general, was commander of a band of
Indians who scalped and killed a number of Onion soldiers during the
Battle of Pea Ridge (Ark.).®^

Military records show that Indians at the Battle of Pea Ridge
conducted warfare with "barbarity." Adjutant John W. Noble of the
Third Iowa Regiment said: " . . .from personal inspection . . .1
discovered that eight of the men . . .had been scalped."®'^

Adjutant Noble added that the bodies had been exhumed and
many showed "unmistakable evidence" of having been "murdered
after they were wounded."®®

51

First sergeant Daniel Bradbury swore he was present at the Battle
on March 7, 1862 and saw Indians "doing as they pleased." The next
day, he saw about 3,000 Indians "marching in good order under the
command of Albert Pike."®®

In a letter dated March 21, 1862, Pike was admonished by D. H.
Maury, assistant Adjutant General of the Trans-Mississippi District, "to
restrain [Indians under his command] from committing any barbarities
upon the wounded prisoners, or dead who may fall into their hands. "®^

The New York Times reported that Pike had "seduced the Indians
into war paint."®®

Pike was born in Massachusetts in 1809, but moved to Arkansas
as a young man, where he became president of the State Council of
the anti-Catholic American Party, an early Know-Nothing
organization.

In 1861, Pike wrote a pamphlet, "State or Province, Bond or Free,"
addressed to the people of Arkansas following Abraham Lincoln's
election to the Presidency of the Clnited States, but prior to his
inauguration. In the pamphlet. Pike said the border States should at
once "unite with the states that have seceded and are yet to secede,
meet them in convention, and aid in framing a Constitution and
setting on foot a Government."

Then, he continued, there will no longer be a few seceded States,
"but a new and powerful confederacy, to attempt to coerce which
would be a simple fatuity. A war against it would be too expensive a
luxury for the North to indulge in, and would, moreover, defeat its own
purpose. "®®

Pike served as Commissioner to the Indians West of Arkansas in
the Confederate States of America, and between July 10 and October
7, 1861 concluded Treaties of Friendship and Alliance with seven
Indian nations on behalf of the Confederacy. The treaties gave certain
tribes the unqualified right of admission as a State of the Confederacy
and allowed each tribe a delegate in the Confederate Congress.
However, President Jefferson Davis of the Confederacy urged that that
aspect of the treaties be deleted.

Subsequently, the Commanches were "greatly astonished on
being informed that they had made a treaty with enemies of the
Government of their Great Father in Washington."^®

That history of Albert Pike is rarely, if ever, discussed by Masons.
He remains to them "an outstanding man,"^^ a "great man . . .a truly
universal and creative genius . . .an inexhaustible mine of inspiration,
[and] a mental and spiritual giant.

52

Other Integral Characteristics of Masonry

There are other distasteful characteristics integral to Masonry
which are little noted, but deserve mention.

Prejudice

Masonry's "Landmarks" have been described by a Craftsman as
"those peculiar marks of distinction by which we are separated from
the profane world, and by which we are enabled to designate our
inheritance as the 'Sons of light.'" These Landmarks are
"unrepeatable" and "can suffer no change.

Among such inflexible laws of Masonry is Landmark No. 18,
which lists qualifications for membership in the Craft. That Landmark
says no man can be a Freemason unless he is "unmutilated" and
"freeborn." It is further stipulated that neither women, slaves, nor one
born in slavery are qualified for initiation into the rites of the Masonic
Fraternity.^"^

In that connection, it is interesting to note that Albert Pike, writing
of the Aryans who peopled the earth about 10,000 years ago, said:

They were white men . . .the superior race in intellect, in
manliness, the governing race of the world, the conquering
race of all other nations.

Continuing, he asserted: "The single fact that we owe not one
single truth, not one idea in philosophy or religion to the Semitic race
is, of itself, ample reward for years of study, and it is a fact
indisputable, if 1 read the Veda and Zend Avesta aright.

The Veda is the collection of sacred writings of the Aryans who
invaded Northern India in 1500 B.C. The Zend Avesta is a compilation
of the sacred writings and commentary thereon of the Zoroastrian
religion of ancient Persia.

In his Lectures on the Arya, Pike noted that Yima (first of all men
created, and the first with whom Ahru Mazda conversed) ultimately
lived among people who had perfect stature and "no other marks
which are the token of Anra-Mainyus, the Evil Principle, which he has
made among men."

Regarding the "other marks," Pike said:

By which it appears that deformity was considered as a
mark put on man by the Evil One; and that Yima selected for
his colonists only those in whom there was no physical

53

defect.^®

Perhaps that Zoroastrian view is responsible for Masons permitting
only the "unmutilated" to "colonize" lodges of the Craft, as required by
the Fraternity's Landmark 18.

Another example of Masonic prejudice was evidenced in a 1928
New Age review of a book, Reforging America, by Dr. Lothrop
Stoddard. The reviewer said the book's author "clearly demonstrates
the necessity of America retaining its racial purity." The reviewer
added: "[T]he influence of Masonry upon the author's philosophy is
evident throughout the volume.

Another article in the official journal of the Scottish Rite concerned
the Indians of Mexico and purported to explain why so many
revolutions have occurred in that country. The article said:

The Indian, as such, is superstitious, immobile, a
silhouette of stone. He breeds rapidly and would completely
overrun the country and dominate by sheer force of numbers
were it not for the fact that during each "revolution" hundreds
of Indians are killed or die from disease.

The Indian of today in Mexico is the "leftover," still native
and Christian, God-fearing, a superstitious dominated being.

[He is part of] a structure of ignorance, slavery and servitude .

. .under the domination of the Church, whose sole idea was to
maintain this servitude and ignorance.^®

Commenting on the fact that Negro Masons have their own
exclusive black Masonic organization. Grand Commander John
Cowles explained that "most of the so-called colored Grand Lodges"
trace their history to Prince Hall, a Negro who claimed that he was
initiated into an English Army Lodge in Boston. Then the Grand
Commander noted that "all regular Grand Lodges in the CJnited States
do not recognize any colored or Negro Masonry."^^

Cowles addressed the same subject in 1947, but said it is not
"because of their color" that blacks are not allowed into the lodges of
"regular" Masonry. Rather, it is "the general characteristics of the race
as it exists in this country and the apparent incompatible social
reactions of the two races."®®

The Grand Commander called attention to a photostatic copy of a
joint letter in the files of the Supreme Council signed by the Grand
Secretary of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts and the Deputy of the
Supreme Council of the Scottish Rite of the Northern Jurisdiction in
Massachusetts, dated February 7, 1925, which allegedly says a black

54

member was expelled from Freemasonry "on the technical ground
that he had falsified as to the place of his birth; that . . .[he] had
claimed to be an Indian, and that the Grand Lodge had evidence
'amply sufficient to prove that he was not an Indian at all, but a Negro,
and other things to his discredit.'

Cowles said that on one side of the photostatic copy of the
Massachusetts Grand Secretary's letter appears the statement: "The
Masons could not afford to admit that they had initiated a Negro, so he
was expelled upon the technical ground of fraud in naming his
birthplace."®^

in 1976, a Masonic affiliate organization for girls, the International
Order of the Rainbow, suspended all Iowa chapters of the group
because one local chapter endorsed membership of a 12-year-old
black girl.

According to press reports, Michelle Palmer, whose father is white
and mother is black, had been invited to join the Rainbow chapter in
Indianola, Iowa, and was approved by the local assembly in October
of that year. However, officials at the Rainbow's international
headquarters at McAlester, Oklahoma ruled that all 136 Rainbow
assemblies in Iowa must disband by the end of the year because they
did not follow "rules and regulations."

it was explained that the organization was taking disciplinary
action on the basis of an "unwritten law" which excludes blacks from
membership.®®

Subsequently, it was reported that a majority of the 61 national
Rainbow assemblies had voted to drop the so-called "unwritten law"
which banned Negro girls from Rainbow.®"^

This Masonic racism persists to this day in both "regular" Masonry
and Prince Hall Masonry, and the issue is rarely questioned in
nominations to the judiciary or to other positions in government which
require the strictest sense of fairness.

in 1979, The Washington Star carried an article by Robert Pear,
the lead paragraph of which asked: "Should a federal judge belong to
a social club that excludes blacks--or women?"

The article went on to note that the question occurred with
"embarrassing frequency" in connection with President Jimmy
Carter's nominees for federal judgeships, because so many of the
candidates belonged to racially exclusive "social clubs, eating clubs
or other fraternal organizations."

Pear wrote: "The issue of white-only private clubs haunted
Attorney General Griffin B. Bell at his confirmation hearings in 1977.
He agreed to resign from the Piedmont Driving Club and the Capital

55

City Club in Atlanta because, he said, "the attorney general is so
symbolic of equal justice under the law.'

Of course, even more the symbols of equal justice are the
Justices of the Supreme Court of the CJnited States.

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
(NAACP) and the National Women's Political Caucus (NWPC), Pear
observed in his Star article, "say judges should not belong to any
clubs that discriminate on the basis of race, sex, religion or national
origin."®®

Interestingly enough, on May 6, 1983, Vice President George Bush
addressed the all-black Prince Hall Grand Masters of Masons, at the
invitation of Benjamin Hooks, president of the NAACP, and a Grand
Mason secretary from Tennessee.®^

Adding insult to injury, the State Supreme Court of New Jersey
decided in 1986 that a low-level State-court employee must step
down as an officer of a local NAACP chapter in order to avoid the
appearance of judicial involvement in political disputes.

The State Supreme Court also ordered the Monmouth County
Superior Court attendant in question to resign from a taxpayers'
group, a local mental-health board and four other groups.®®

Earlier, the Maryland Senate enacted legislation to deny a tax
exemption to Burning Tree Country Club because it discriminates
against women. The amendment exempted the Masons, the Elks and
the Moose, because they were considered "charitable
organizations." ®^

Atheism

A careful reading of Masonic literature will make it evident that the
Craft rejects the God of the Scriptures.

The basic Masonic law requires initiates never to be "a stupid
atheist." But a knowledgeable Mason observed: "Let us not be
deceived. All atheists are not stupid.

Pike, writing of atheism, said Nature is "self-originated, or always
was and had been the cause of its own existence."®^

The test as to belief in God, he asserted, is whether the qualities
exist, "regardless of what name is given these qualities."

Real atheism, he said, "is the denial of existence of any God, of
the actuality of all possible ideas of God. It denies that there is any
Mind, Intelligence or Ens that is the cause and Providence of the
Universe . . . ."®^

Joseph Fort Newton, one of the Fraternity's august theologians,
declared: "To enter our Lodges a man must confess his faith in God--

56

though he is not required definitely to define in what terms he thinks of
God . . ."93

Newton explained Masonic faith as follows: "Faith in the CJniverse
as friendly to fraternal enterprise . . . [I]t affirms . . .that man was made
for man. "94

Another Masonic writer said: "man is divine, and his divinity is
within himself. "93 And yet another New Age writer declared: "When
we talk to God we are talking to ourselves, for God and Man are one
and the same through the ties of Love . . . "9®

Teacher of the World's Children

A previously noted quotation by Albert Pike (page 47, above) is
important to recall. He said: "It is the province of Masonry to teach all
truths, not moral truth alone, but political and philosophical, and even
religious truth."

Indeed, shaping the minds of the world's youth has been an
unremitting major activity of the Masonic Fraternity.

Historian Mildred Headings said the true purpose pursued by
French Masons is "the fall of all dogmas and the ruin of all
churches. "9^ She also noted that the Fraternity successfully
campaigned in France to promote universal obligatory lay education
and the use of school texts with Masonic values. 9®

And what happened in France, has happened largely in America.

In 1915, the Scottish Rite urged that graduates of American public
schools be given "preference in every appointment to public

office. "99

In 1920, during a special session held at Colorado Springs,
Colorado, the Supreme Council of the Scottish Rite drew up a
comprehensive education plan for the youth of the country. The plan
called for sending all children through public schools for a certain
number of years, and recommended the careful selection of school
trustees and teachers, as well as supervisors of school textbooks and
libraries, in order to exclude "sectarian propaganda." ^9®

The Masonic plan also urged the establishment of "a national
department of public education headed by a secretary appointed as a
member of the President's Cabinet."^®!

Almost immediately, the Craft's various Journals propagandized in
favor of the proposals--which were to become generally embodied in
legislation through the 1920s and 30s known as the Smith-Towner Bill,
the Towner-Sterling Bill, and the Sterling-Reed Bill, reflecting the
names of the Representatives and Senators who had introduced the

57

legislation.^®^

In 1922, the State of Oregon, with the help of the Supreme Council
and the Imperial Council of the Nobles of the Mystic Shrine (the group
so beloved for its children's hospitals and circus presentations), was
successful in lobbying for the passage of legislation which outlawed
Catholic and other parochial schools in the State.

The law was declared unconstitutional by the CJ.S. Supreme Court
in 1925, in Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 Cl.S. 510. (See pp. 5-6).

The "apostle of free, public schools," Horace Mann, was a
Freemason, and, according to his wife, was an enthusiastic advocate
of the philosophy of religion, a philosophy which was "scientific,
humanitarian, ethical, [and] naturalistic . . . ." Mann believed in
"character education without 'creeds,' and in phrenology as a basis
for 'scientific education.' " He held that "natural religion stands . .
.preeminent over revealed religion . . ."104

in 1930, a Masonic writer said: "in America, public education is
the right and duty of the state . . .For the time may come . . .when by
unchecked operation of biologic law, and other considerations.
Catholics will be a majority in these Clnited States . .

Four years later, another New Age contributor boldly proclaimed:
"The practical object of Masonry is the moral, intellectual and
spiritual improvement of the individual and society."^®®

But by 1935, the Masonic efforts to totally dominate the minds of
American children had not come to fruition because, as a New Age
editorial noted, eight of the 15 members of the House Committee on
Education were Roman Catholics. That situation prompted the
Scottish Rite journal to say: "Hence, so long as this condition exists in
Congress there will be little opportunity for creating a Department of
Education. "^®^

it is now apparent that if that handful of Catholic members of the
House Education Committee had not prevailed, and subsequently
been succeeded by equally steadfast Catholic Congressmen and
Senators into the very early 1960s, every school child (including this
writer) might have been propagandized with naturalism as the
established national religion, long before the Masonically dominated
Supreme Court effectively imposed that curriculum on the nation's
public school system when it outlawed Bible reading and school
prayers in 1962 and 1963.

if the views of one Masonic writer are reasonably representative of
the mind of Masonry, and they undoubtedly are, the likelihood of a
Masonically imposed naturalism on America's school children was
clearly a possibility before mid-20th Century. The writer declared:

58

The dramatic presentation of the 32nd degree of the
Scottish Rite expresses a code of ethics which is essentially
natural religion ... .In this support of natural religion, Scottish
Rite masonry presents an excellent example of what might be
followed in our public schools . . .There can be no well-
founded objection to the presentation of natural religion.^®®

Another recommendation for public school children was that they
should be taught the "balance between good and evil."^®® Nine years
later, the same theme was advanced in an editorial which called for
strengthening "education for life . . .the knowledge of good and

evil, "1 10

The official organ of the Scottish Rite of the Southern Jurisdiction
published an article in 1959 which said every Mason becomes a
teacher of "Masonic philosophy to the community," and the Craft is
"the missionary of the new order--a Liberal order . . .in which Masons
become high priests."^

The article proclaimed that this "Masonic philosophy" which has
brought forth a "New Order" had become a reality by "the
establishment of the public school system, financed by the State, for
the combined purpose of technological and sociological education of
the mass of humanity, beginning at an early age in childhood."^

At the same time, another Craftsman asserted that the Fraternity
"provided the major obstacle" to the growth of religious-oriented
education.^

In 1968, a 33rd Degree Mason said: "The keynote of Masonic
religious thinking is naturalism which sees all life and thought as ever
developing and evolutionary . .

The Bible, said Brother Leonard Wenz, "is not today what it once
was." Current higher criticism, he observed, has "made obsolete the
idea that the Bible is a unique revelation of supernatural truth."^

While the Court has outlawed public recitation of the Bible as a
religious work in public schools, the "Americanism" program of the
Scottish Rite has mandated that members of the Fraternity
disseminate Masonic materials in public schools.^ And the brethren
take that role seriously.

In 1959, the Grand Commander said Franklin W. Patterson, 33rd
Degree, secretary of the Scottish Rite Lodge at Baker, Oregon,
succeeded in persuading the principal of the local high school to use
Masonic-oriented texts in the local public schools.^Also, the
Scottish Rite bodies of Alexandria, Virginia "placed the New Age

59

magazine in all public school libraries within their jurisdiction."^^®

In 1965, Grand Commander Luther A. Smith reported that Masonic
booklets had been "distributed by sets to every room in every school"
in the Charlotte, North Carolina public school system. The
Superintendent of Schools for that jurisdiction made the Masonic
propaganda "required reading."^

In 1965, Major General Herman Nickerson, 33rd Degree,
Commander of the Cl.S. Marine Corps facility at Camp Lejune, N.C.,
was commended by the Supreme Council for introducing the
Supreme Council's books on "Americanism" into the schools under
his command attended by children of Marine Corps personnel.In
1966, General Nickerson received an award from the Freedoms
Foundation at Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, for "his citizenship
program at Camp Lejune . . .

Subsequently, General Nickerson became Director of Personnel
for the Cl.S. Marine Corps and on May 8, 1968 was the principal
speaker when 17 West Point cadets "were obligated" as "soldier
Masons" one month prior to being commissioned second lieutenants
"to carry out our ideals in Vietnam.

George Washington University in the nation's capital has long had
close ties to Freemasonry, and has been the recipient of its largess.
Not only did it receive $1 million from the Masons in the 1920s, it has
received additional funds from the Masonic International "High Twelve
Clubs," the Masons of Louisiana, the National League of Masonic
Clubs, and the Knights Templar.

When George Washington University restructured its Masonic-
funded School of Government in 1966, it consolidated the Department
of Government and Business and existing programs "at the U.S. Air
Force Command and Staff School, Maxwell Air Force Base in
Alabama, and the Industrial College of the Armed Forces (ICAF) at
Ft. McNair, Washington, D.C."

The consolidation was effected only "after a conference was held
with Grand Commander [Luther] Smith and his approval obtained."

The ICAF is the highest and most prestigious of all federal
educational institutions.

Moreover, Masonic influence is threaded through most college
fraternities, and their rituals were written and insignia designated by
Masons. However, only four college fraternities were founded
exclusively for Masons: Acacia, founded at the University of Michigan
in 1904; Square and Compass, founded at Washington and Lee
University in 1917; Sigma Mu Sigma, founded at Tri-State College in
1921; and the Order of the Golden Key, founded at the University of

60

Oklahoma in 1925.

In 1952, Square and Compass merged with Sigma Mu Sigma, "to
thoroughly indoctrinate the college men of America with the traditions
of our American Masonic heritage.

61

PART II

TARGET-THE CHURCH

62

3/ WARRING ON THE CHORCH-I

A cursory review of the social climate at the time State and
federal laws were enacted to deny aid to "sectarian" institutions sadly
discloses that those statutes really are musty memorials to
appeasement of Know-Nothings, who once ruled America.

Those statutory stains of bigotry were designed primarily to
prohibit equality of government assistance for Catholic parochial
schools, which were competing with the essentially Protestant public
school system. CJltimately, those laws served as historic precedent to
buttress arguments by the Court in subsequent decisions which
outlawed nearly all public accommodation for traditional Judeo-
Christian beliefs and values in public life.

Moreover, the Masonic Fraternity, an age-old militant enemy of the
Church, strongly influenced the secret societies which formed the
hard core of the Nativist and Know-Nothing movements that lobbied
so successfully to impose those essentially anti-Catholic edicts upon
the nation.

This was evident, not only by the secrecy Know-Nothings
imposed on their members to conceal the organization's true purpose,
but by Masonic membership of Know-Nothing leaders.

Nativism was characterized by the late Canon Anson Phelps
Stokes of the Washington Cathedral as "the aggressive American
Anglo-Saxon Protestant tradition," which goes back to the
Reformation in England and came to America through the New
England Puritans.

That tradition, he said, "developed the 'No-Popery' slogan as a
protection against the feared overthrow of the English form of civil
government."^

He noted that Nativism coalesced under a variety of titles: the
Native American Democratic Association; the Order of the Sons of
America; the Order of the Star-Spangled Banner; the Order of Know-
Nothings; the American Protective Association; and the Invisible
Empire of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.^

A more accurate perspective on the groups mentioned by the
former Canon of the Washington Cathedral was provided by Albert
Stevens in his seminal book on the origins of secret societies in the
United States. He found that the Masonic Fraternity is "the parent

63

organization of all modern secret societies."^

Stevens traced the "germ" of American patriotic and political
secret societies to the Loyal Orange institution, which "had Masonic
antecedents." Its cardinal principle, he said, was "loyalty to the
occupants of the British throne and opposition to the Roman Catholic
Church.""^

Orangeism appeared early in the CJnited States, "and the members
of earlier American patriotic secret societies (1840-1855) were
pronounced 'Native Americans' and anti-Roman Catholic: The Orders
of Clnited American Mechanics (Senior and Junior), Sons of America,
Brotherhood of the Onion, American Protestant Association, the
Know-Nothing party (Order of the Star-Spangled Banner), and others,
were conspicuous during the period referred to . . .others spreading
into the American Protective Association movement, which had been
conspicuous in American politics."^

However, anti-Catholic bias came to America long before the
Know-Nothing movement. As Stokes observed, it was evident in the
first colonial settlements.

Prior to the 19th Century, concern about the Church's inroads into
America was demonstrated by stringent opposition to the Quebec Act,
passed by the British Parliament in 1774 to institute a permanent
administration in Canada. It was one of the "Intolerable Acts"
complained of by the American colonists, and was directly alluded to
in the "Declaration of Independence."

The Act, which contributed to the outbreak of the American
Revolution, gave the French Canadians complete religious freedom.
However, the American colonists saw it as nullifying "many of the
Western claims of the coast colonies by extending the boundaries of
the province of Quebec to the Ohio River on the South and the
Mississippi River on the west. The concessions in favor of Roman
Catholicism also aroused resentment among Protestants in the
Colonies."®

It was obvious, too, that the Act effectively extended the
jurisdiction of the Bishop of Quebec into those western areas, a matter
of some concern to the Protestant colonists.

Further evidence of the second-class status of Catholics in
colonial America was set forth in the early constitutions of
Massachusetts (1780), New Hampshire (1796), New Jersey (1790),
North Carolina (1776) and Vermont (1786), all of which expressly
stated a preference for the "Protestant" religion.^

The pervasiveness of this opposition to all things Catholic was
evident in an examination by Sister Marie Lenore Fell of more than

64

1,000 textbooks used in public schools during the period 1783-1860.
Sister Marie pursued her research to determine the influence of these
books on youth who later became "rulers of the country and molders
of party politics."®

She found that the "No Popery" cries, so common during the years
preceding the Civil War, could be traced to the childhood training of
the nation's leaders.®

Her investigations demonstrated that the Quebec Act was stressed
in a number of school texts.

Among those texts, Samuel Whelpy's A Compend of History
(which went through many editions between 1807-1856) asserted that
the powers of the ecclesiastical state from the first part of the 7th
Century were "carnal, sensual, and devilish."^ ^

Whelpy also identified the Church of Rome with the woman sitting
on a scarlet-colored beast, who is called "the mother of harlots" in St.
John's Apocalypse. He identified the beast as "the temporal powers
which gave her support."

Another text charged that Popery kept the people of Europe in
ignorance by forbidding them to inquire into their duties, and
commanded them to believe whatever priests told them. The ignorant
people, the author wrote, would work for the priests and support large
numbers of them in idleness.^®

Conrad Malte-Brun's A System of Clniversal Geography (1834)
depicted the Church in Catholic countries as prohibiting the
dissemination of knowledge and as keeping the people in
ignorance.

This type of education, perpetuated under public auspices, shaped
the future Church-State conflicts and fueled the attendant violence. It
also assured that the fullness of the free exercise of religion would be
denied to Catholics, who were by far the largest non-Protestant
minority group.

Insult, Abuse And Violence

The almost inexhaustible catalogue of insult, abuse and violence
against one religious minority in America can only be highlighted.

On November 3, 1831, St. Mary's Catholic Church on Sheriff
Street, New York City, was deliberately set afire and totally destroyed
with its furnishings and sacred vessels. No effort was made to fix
responsibility by judicial inquiry.

65

In 1836, Bishop John Purcell of Cincinnati deplored the
calumnious writings against Catholics which were distributed
everywhere. Above all, he was concerned because religious and
political tracts were made available to children and imbued them with
hatred and prejudice against the Catholic Church.^®

Protestant preachers urged their members to preserve the nation
from the blight of Romanism, asserting that the Valley of the
Mississippi was to be either a sacred depository or sepulcher for their
own religious and Christian principles, which now were endangered
by the Roman Catholic Church.

Among the most notable opponents of the rise of Catholicism in
the West was the famous Boston Presbyterian clergyman. Rev. Lyman
Beecher.

On August 11, 1834, following a series of anti-Catholic sermons
by Beecher, the Clrsuline Convent at Charlestown, a Boston suburb,
was set afire and sacked by a mob. Even the cemetery was violated:
graves were dug up, coffins were opened, and their contents
exposed.^®

In his best-selling book, A Plea For The West, the Boston clerical
firebrand wrote: " . . .the conflict which is to decide the destiny of the
West will be a conflict of institutions for the education of her sons, for
the purposes of superstition, or evangelical light; of despotism or
liberty."^®

He insisted that the Catholic clergy, because of their "unlimited
power" over the consciences of the immigrants, "would exert decisive
political influence." He further warned:

If we do not provide the schools which are requisite for the
cheap and effectual education of the children of the nation, it
is perfectly certain that the Catholic powers of Europe intend
to make up the deficiency, and there is no reason to doubt that
they will do it, until, by immigration and Catholic education,
we become to such an extent a Catholic nation, that with their
peculiar power of acting as one body, they will become the
predominant power of the nation.^®

Later, the Boston minister wrote in his autobiography: "Before I left
(Boston), the tide had turned and Catholicism forever in New England
must row upstream, carefully watched and increasingly understood
and obstructed by public sentiment.

On August 19, 1835, an editorial appeared in the Detroit Journal
and Courier, a Whig publication, which said foreigners and Catholics

66

were "chosen instruments of the demagogues to strengthen and
perpetuate their ruinous influence over the people of this country.

A public school teacher in Buffalo taught the children under his
care that "the Catholics, no matter where they dwell, are considered
lower in the scale of mental cultivation and refinement than the
Protestant," and that "the degradation is due to their being deprived of
the Bible by their priesthood.

Author Carlton Beals noted that James Harper, head of Harper
Brothers publishing house, was elected the first Know-Nothing Mayor
of New York City, and the publishing house itself had set up a front
firm, operated by two Harper employees, to publish the obscenely
anti-Catholic tract. The Awful Disclosures of Maria Monk. The book
was an overnight best-seller, and sold more than 300,000 copies prior
to the Civil War.^”^

Samuel F.B. Morse, inventor of the telegraph and a recognized
painter of distinction, in his extraordinarily popular book. Foreign
Conspiracy, pleaded for Protestants to lay aside their inter-sectarian
feuds and awaken to the menace of Catholicism. He urged them to:
unite against Catholic schools; throw out all Catholic office-holders;
and terminate lenient immigration and naturalization laws.^^

In one periodical of the day it was remarked that abuse of
Catholics had become "a regular trade," and the writing and
publishing of anti-Catholic books were "a part of the regular industry
of the country, as much as the making of nutmeg or the construction
of clocks."^®

New York Public School Controversy

By 1840, the religious war against Catholics had taken a turn for
the worse. In New York City, Archbishop John Hughes asked the
Public School Society for funding for schools under his jurisdiction
similar to accommodations made for other religious groups.

The controversy focused on an 1813 law which directed the Free
School Society of the City of New York (later called the Public School
Society) to apportion educational funds to, among others, "such
incorporated religious societies in said city, as now support or
hereafter shall establish charity schools within the said city, who may
apply for the same."

Shortly thereafter, a number of religious organizations were
admitted to participation in the fund. For example, fifty children of
Freemasons were taught from 1810 to 1817 by the Free School

67

Society for an annual charge of six dollars per child. After that period,
the Freemasons' children were educated without charge.

In 1821, Bethel Baptist Church received a portion of the fund, and
legislation was passed the following year which provided additional
money for that Church to cover the costs of buildings, training of
teachers, and for "all other needful purposes of a common school
education."^®

In 1831, the Catholic Orphan Asylum participated in the program.
But, nine years later, when the Catholic Benevolent Society applied
for funds for parochial school students because the religious
curriculum in the public schools was incompatible with the
consciences of Catholic students, the legislature passed a law which
denied aid to any school which teaches "sectarian doctrine."^®

Commenting on the incident, historian Ray Allen Billington said
the Catholics had "a just cause for complaint against the Public
School Society's monopoly over educational facilities in New York
City."

He noted that the King James version of the Scriptures was read
daily in all of the schools of the Society, and that the regular prayers,
singing, and religious instruction were contrary to Catholic belief. The
textbooks, particularly, were the source of complaint, he said,
because "all were blatantly Protestant in sympathy and many were
openly disrespectful of Catholicism."®®

Archbishop Hughes requested the School Society to hold a public
meeting so both sides of the issue could be aired. The Council
agreed, and on October 29, 1840, the New York Ordinary stood alone
to defend his position, while arrayed against him was "a whole field of
talent gathered from the legal profession and the Protestant clergy."

Hughes spoke for three hours. The rebuttal lasted three whole
days. In the climate of the day, it was not surprising that the Bishop
lost his case.

Remarking on the outcome of the debate. Dr. Billington wrote: "It
was obvious that prejudice was to rule rather than reason."®^

Because State and City officials would authorize only the King
James Bible and Protestant hymns and textbooks in the public
schools. Archbishop Hughes urged a completely secular system of
education devoid of all sectarian influence. Although a law was
passed to accomplish that purpose, the Nativists controlled the
educational establishment and the King James Bible remained firmly
entrenched in public schools.®^

To American Protestants there was only one Bible, and if Catholics
objected to reading that version, they obviously must be opposed to

68

the Sacred Book.^^

That view was the flashpoint of the conflict, and is a misperception
which has continued to this day.^'^

The controversy inflamed passions in Philadelphia, Newark,
Salem, Albany and Detroit; and propagandists pressed home the idea
that all over the country Catholics were trying to gain control of the
nation's educational system in order to subjugate America, just as
Beecher and Morse had warned.

The situation greatly intensified in 1842, when a Canadian
missionary priest visiting Carbeau, New York, became "justly
angered" because a Bible Society distributed the King James version
of the Scriptures to Catholics in the parish where he was staying. Over
objections by the local pastor, the visiting priest publicly burned
several copies of the Bible the Society had distributed.

This "Champlain Bible burning" incident, as it became known,
quickly exploded into an issue which aroused national indignation,
and convinced an increasing number of people to accept organized
anti-Catholicism.^®

The War Against Catholics Intensifies

At a meeting of the American Protestant Association in
Philadelphia on November 22, 1842, ninety-four ministers,

representing twelve denominations, signed a constitution which said
the Papacy was in its "principles and tendencies, subversive to civil
and religious liberty, and destructive to the spiritual welfare of men."

It was agreed that the only way to combat this situation was
through united church action. The members pledged further
circulation of the Bible and anti-Catholic books, to "awaken the
attention of the community to the dangers which threaten these United
States from the assaults of Romanism.

In such a combustible atmosphere, violence, literally, was only a
stone's throw away.

* In November, 1844, three days of rioting took place in
Philadelphia, during which a cannon was fired point blank into
St. Philip Neri Catholic Church. St. Michael's and St.
Augustine's churches were burned, as were 30 Catholic
homes. Official inquiry blamed the Papists.^®

* In 1846, during the War with Mexico, Catholic soldiers
were not only required to attend Protestant services, but were

69

forced to listen to denunciations of their faith.

* in 1852, Pope Pius IX, like many world leaders, sent a
block of marble as a gift to be installed in the Washington
Monument, then under construction in the nation's capital. A
mob broke into the shed where the block was stored, and stole
it. Allegedly the Papal gift was thrown into the Potomac River,
although there is no record it has ever been found.

* in 1853, a Navy petty officer was put in chains for
refusing to attend Protestant worship. Similar incidents took
place in public almshouses."^^

* in 1853, Archbishop Gaetano Bedini visited the Clnited
States en route to his post as Papal Nuncio to Brazil. Violence
and bloodshed followed as he travelled to Boston, Baltimore,
Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, St. Louis and Wheeling. On Christmas
Day, 1853, an attempt was made on the Nuncio's life by a
mob of 600.

Those incidents were incited by Know-Nothing speakers
and anti-Catholic attacks in the press."^^

* On July 4, 1854, natives of Dorchester, Massachusetts
celebrated the day by blowing up the Catholic Church of that
city at 3 A.M.

Similar destruction of Catholic churches took place at
Sidney and Massillon, Ohio; Brooklyn and Saugerties, New
York; Norwalk, Connecticut; and Galveston, Texas.

During that same month, a Jesuit priest was tarred and
feathered in Ellsworth, Maine.

* On July 8, 1854, a Catholic church in Bath, Maine was
burned to the ground after a man, called "the Angel Gabriel,"
lectured in that city for two days against Popery.''^"^

* On July 10, 1854, there was a riot between "Americans
and Irish" at Lawrence, Massachusetts, and several Catholic
houses were "gutted.""^^

* Five days later. The New York Daily Times reported on
a Know-Nothing riot at Buffalo, New York in which "seven or
eight Irishmen's heads were broken, but no one was killed."'^®

* Also, during that year, the Supreme Court of Maine ruled
that school authorities had a right to force the reading of the
King James Bible on all children, even though that version of
the Scriptures was contrary to Catholic beliefs.

The decision (Donahoe v. Richards, 38 Maine, 379) was
the leading judicial standard for the nation for the next 50
years.

70

* In 1859, a young student, William Wall, was expelled
from school in Boston for refusing to read the Protestant
version of the Bible and Ten Commandments. CJpon his return
to school, he was severely beaten for one-half hour by the
school headmaster, McLaurin F. Cook, who commented to the
class:

"Here's a boy that refuses to repeat the Ten
Commandments. I will whip him 'till he yields if it takes
the whole afternoon."

After 30 minutes of such barbarity, the boy relented and
did as he was directed. His father took the case to court, but
the suit was dismissed by a Know-Nothing judge.

Know-Nothing Power

The political power of the Know-Nothings was so great that they
claimed to control nearly half of the entire popular vote cast in the
1852 Presidential election. The Party carried municipal elections in
Philadelphia, Baltimore, New York, San Francisco and New
Orleans.'^®

The New York Daily Times made little effort to disguise its own
affinity for the Know-Nothing movement. Not only did it regularly
suggest that citizens of Irish descent were not truly Americans (as the
July 11, 1854 headline--"Serious Riot Between Americans and Irish at
Lawrence, Mass"--suggests), but it editorialized in support of Know-
Nothing candidates.

An editorial in November, 1854 attacked Fernando Wood,
nominee of the "Soft Democrats" (those "soft" on the issue of
slavery), as being "utterly unfit" to serve as Mayor.

The Times asserted that Wood had issued a statement denouncing
Know-Nothings, although "it is known to thousands" that he "has been
a member of the Order," and "acted as one of its Executive
Committee." There was no further evidence to support the statement.

The editorial continued by praising Wood's opponent, "the Know-
Nothing and Temperance candidate," James W. Barker.

There immediately followed another editorial titled, "James W.
Barker," which claimed the newspaper had received a number of
communications defending Barker against attacks that had been

71

made about him.

Despite the Times endorsement, Barker lost.'^®

The Times seemed enthused by the 1854 election results, as
indicated by an editorial headline which proclaimed: "The Victory--
The Know-Nothing Movement."^®

The editorial said the tremendous showing of the Know-Nothing
Movement in New York State bears "abundant evidence of its moral
power [sic]."

That movement, the Times continued, "rests partly upon hostility
to Roman Catholicism," and partly upon jealousy of foreigners. No
distinction was made regarding the difference, if any, between the two
groups.

The editorial asserted that the "great mass of members of all the
great Protestant sects regard Catholicism as far more dangerous than
Slavery--and all Catholics as subject in all things, civil and
ecclesiastical, to the dictation of an absolute despot--who has hitherto
held all Europe in subjection, and who now seeks similar authority
over the American Republic."

The commentary continued by noting that immigrant Irish citizens
had established residence in nearly all communities of any size in the
State, "and made themselves unpleasantly felt on the labor, religion,
morals, and above all, on the politics of the place."

Emphasizing that Irish voters were not truly Americans, the
editorial charged that politicians are "twice as careful to speak
pleasantly to an Irish voter as to an American." (Emphasis added.)

The Times commentary concluded on a curiously inflammatory
note which seemed to sanction some undefined nefarious secret
actions against the Irish, possibly even violence. It said: " . . .in a
secret society, where no risks are run, the temptation to do something
that shall 'fix these Irish' is too strong to be resisted." (Emphasis by
Times.

Several days later, the Times headline trumpeted: "The
Massachusetts Election--Great Know-Nothing Victory."

The headlined article, and a follow-up story, reported that every
Congressional candidate supported by the Know-Nothing Order in
Massachusetts had been elected to office, as had been the Governor,
342 of 349 members of the State House of Representatives, and all
State Senators.

In 1855, a man who later became a towering figure in Scottish Rite
Freemasonry as Grand Commander and Grand Philosopher, Albert
Pike, spoke in Philadelphia at the national convention of the Nativist

72

American Republican Party, of which he was an official. However, in
his address to the gathering, which the Times called a Know-Nothing
meeting. Pike said nothing significant.®^

Governor Neils Brown of Tennessee addressed the same meeting
and said the religion of America is Protestantism, and it must be
protected.

Rome, he observed, "has now a Vatican, and a people who are
organ grinders and paupers."

If Catholicism were established in the CJnited States, he warned,
the Pope would not only look after the souls of Catholics, but their
politics.®^

Although Pike said nothing significant at Philadelphia, several
weeks earlier, on April 30, as President of the Arkansas State Council
of the (Know-Nothing) American Republican Party, he had addressed
that State's Party members during their first annual convention.

He said he was fearful of foreign-born voters, whom he identified
as predominantly Catholic, and warned that the foreign vote
comprised 30 to 51 percent of the electorate in eight major American
cities.

Those cities, and their percentage of foreign voters, were
identified as: Philadelphia (30 percent); Louisville (32 percent);
Boston (34 percent); Baltimore (40 percent); New York (46 percent);
Cincinnati (47 percent); New Orleans (49 percent); and St. Louis (51
percent).®®

Pike and his allies were quite perceptive. During the decade 1845-
1855, over a million-and-a-quarter Irish immigrants arrived in the
Clnited States and doubled the Catholic population. Also, the German
population, including a large number of Catholic immigrants from the
Rhine, grew steadily from 1820 onward.®®

In 1856, the Times reported that the National Executive
Committee of the Republican Party (ancestor of today's Republican
Party) had contacted the American Republican Party at its convention
with a view toward a merger of the two political entities.

Mr. Elmore of Massachusetts spoke to his brethren of the
American Republican Party, and expressed the hope that the overture
by the Republican Party "would be well received, because [concert] of
action was the only way in which they could destroy the opposition--
Popery, Slavery and Rum."®^

That effort came to naught, as the slavery issue became the
dominant concern of the nation, and former President Millard Fillmore
accepted the American Party's offer to be its standard bearer in the
forthcoming election.®®

73

The war against Catholicism abated with the growing national
concern about slavery and the explosion of the Civil War. However,
toward the end of the 1860s and the beginning of the 1870s, there
were signs that the conflict was being renewed.

The post-War years saw a number of books in circulation
attacking the Church. In 1871, for example, a book which included 72
cartoons by the famous artist, Thomas Nast, warned the North and
South to beware of efforts by the Vatican to take over the American
public school system. Nast's cartoons depicted Irish Catholics and
Jesuits as monkeys and apes.

The cartoons and the book's text centered on "Miss Columbia," a
figure representing the public school system. She warned that while
the North and South contended with each other, "those who have only
come among us lately will usurp all your rights, and, in fact, it will
only be the story of the camel over again, and you know such a
monopoly as that would be intolerable to both of you."^^

The Boston Pilot reported that by 1873 the militantly anti-Catholic
Order of Clnited American Mechanics controlled the entire Boston
Police Department and were influential at City Hall.®®

Further, other surviving Know-Nothing organizations professed the
same aims as earlier days: to keep the Bible in public schools; to
oppose Catholic schools, and any grants of public money to so-called
"sectarian" institutions; and to oppose the election or appointment of
Catholics to any public office.®^

President Cllysses S. Grant, in an address to the Army of the
Tennessee at Des Moines, Iowa, on September 29, 1875, said:
"Encourage free schools and resolve that not one dollar appropriated
for their support shall be appropriated to the support of any sectarian
schools."®^

The following year, in the Hayes-Tilden Presidential battle, the
Republican Party's platform called for a Constitutional amendment
prohibiting aid to "any school or institution under sectarian control."

In August of that year. Republican Congressman James G. Blaine
of Maine introduced a resolution proposing a Constitutional
amendment to accomplish what President Grant had advocated. But
he added one codicil: "This article shall not be construed to prohibit
the reading of the Bible in any school or institution." The proposal was
defeated on strictly party lines. ®^

(It is significant that prior to the Civil War, only a few State
Constitutions specifically prohibited public funding for religious
institutions, although there were statutory proscriptions on such aid in
several states prior to the War.)®"'^

74

Blaine's Amendment served to emphasize the focal point of the
controversy: all children were expected to be indoctrinated with a
general Protestant concept of Christianity, focused on the King James
version of the Bible. Those who rejected such indoctrination were
considered "sectarian," and, therefore, ineligible to receive financial
support from the State.

There can be little doubt that this extremely biased concept of
"sectarianism" shaped and influenced a multitude of American
legislators and jurists.

That success in proscribing freedom for Catholics and others
apparently led Masonic jurists later to proscribe all conventional
religions. The logic was unassailable: if one religion could be
proscribed, why not all religion?

Humanum Genus Exposes Masonry

in 1884, the simmering issue of secret societies commanded
international attention. On January 14 of that year. The New York
Times ran a lengthy editorial which noted that Pope Leo Xlll was
about to issue a major encyclical on Freemasonry.

The Times said the Pope "seems to have discovered [that]
Freemasonry in this country and in England is a very different sort of
thing [than in France and Italy].

"Anything more innocent than the fraternity, as it is in this country,
could hardly be desired ....

"The Roman Catholic Church, in keeping its members outside the
door of this innocent association, has committed a terrible mistake . .
m65

Subsequently, the subject was mentioned briefly on page 1 of the
Times, where it was noted that the Pope had submitted the encyclical
to the College of Cardinals. No details of the document were provided
by the Times.®®

However, The Milwaukee Catholic Citizen ran a story, datelined
Rome, April 16, which said the Pope's letter would defend "the City of
God" against "the City of Satan."

Secret societies, the Milwaukee Catholic diocesan weekly said,
are locked in a struggle against the Church, and "a grave peril
threatens society." Earlier Popes "very properly excommunicated
Freemasons."

Socialists, the Milwaukee paper asserted, have their "source of
strength in Masonry."®^

75

The Citizen ran the full text of the encyclical in its issue of May 17,
1884.

The Papal letter was far, far different from what the Times had
suggested and, in reality, expressed strong condemnation of
Freemasonry, as The Catholic Citizen had predicted. The Pope was
particularly concerned about Masonry's efforts to control the
education of youth.

Leo's attack was searing and devastating. He not only confirmed,
in substance, what Robison and Barruel had written, but what
Masonry's own writings admit.

The Pope said there is a battle raging between "the kingdom of
God" and the "kingdom of Satan," and that "partisans of evil . . .led on
or assisted by . . . Freemasons" are "boldly rising up against God
Himself."®®

He cited seven encyclicals issued between 1738 and 1865 in
which various Pontiffs had warned "both princes and nations to stand
on their guard, and not allow themselves to be caught by the devices
and snares laid out to deceive them" by Masonry and allied secret
societies.®^

Leo said the Church knew about Masonry "by manifest signs of its
actions, by the investigation of its causes, by the publication of its
laws, and of its rites and commentaries, with the addition often of the
personal testimony of those who were in the secret. . ."^®

Continuing, the encyclical noted that Masonry had been
denounced by the governments of Holland, Austria, Switzerland,
Spain, Bavaria, Savoy, and other parts of Italy.

Freemasonry, he said, was able "by means of fraud or of audacity,
to gain such entrance into every rank of the State as to seem to be
almost its ruling power."^^

The Pope declared:

Freemasons, like the Manichees of old, strive, as far as
possible, to conceal themselves, and to admit no witnesses
but their own members. As a convenient manner of
concealment, they assume the character of literary men and
scholars associated for purposes of learning. They speak of
their zeal for a more cultured refinement, and of their love for
the poor; and they declare their one wish to be the
amelioration of the masses, and to share with the largest
possible number all the benefits of civil life . . .

Moreover, to be enrolled, it is necessary that the
candidates promise and undertake to be thence forward

76

strictly obedient to their leaders and masters with utmost
submission and fidelity . . .or, if disobedient, to submit to the
direst penalties and death itself.

As a fact, if any are judged to have betrayed the doings of
the sect or to have resisted commands given, punishment is
inflicted on them not infrequently, and with so much audacity
and dexterity that the assassin very often escapes the
detection and penalty of his crime.

The ultimate purpose of Freemasonry, Leo said, is "the utter
overthrow of that whole religious and political order of the world which
the Christian teaching has produced, and the substitution of a new
state of things in accordance with their ideas, of which the foundations
and laws shall be drawn from mere naturalism.

Fundamental to Masonry and to naturalists, he said, is that human
nature and human reason "ought in all things to be mistress and
guide." Sincere adherents of Masonry, he continued, "care little for
duties to God, or pervert them by erroneous and vague opinions. For
they deny that anything has been taught by God; they allow no dogma
of religion or truth which cannot be understood by human intelligence,
nor any teacher who ought to be believed by reason of his
authority.

Addressing specifically the issue of religious education, Leo said
Masons imagine States "ought to be constituted without any regard for
the laws and precepts of the Church." Moreover, the Pontiff asserted.
Masons "teach the great error of this age--that regard for religion
should be held as an indifferent matter, and that all religions are
alike.

He added: "With the greatest unanimity the sect of the
Freemasons also endeavors to take to itself the education of youth.
They think that they can easily mold to their opinions that soft and
pliant age, and bend it whither they will . . .Therefore, in the education
and instruction of children they allow no share, either of teaching or of
discipline, to the ministers of the Church; and in many places they
have procured . . .that nothing which treats of the most important and
most holy duties of men to God shall be introduced into the
instructions on morals."^®

Once the fear of God and reverence for divine laws are taken
away, the authority of rulers becomes despised, sedition is permitted,
and popular passions are urged to lawlessness, the Pontiff asserted.
With no restraint, he continued, "a change and overthrow of all things
will necessarily follow."

77

This change and overthrow "is deliberately planned and put
forward by many associations of communists and socialists; and to
their undertakings the sect of Freemasons is not hostile, but greatly
favors their designs, and holds in common with them their chief
opinions.

Freemasons, the Pope declared, "are prepared to shake the
foundations of empires, to harass the rulers of the State, to accuse,
and to cast them out as often as they appear to govern otherwise than
they themselves could have wished . .

The Papal catalogue of criminal activity by Freemasons was
awesome and frightening. Surely such an indictment of an
organization--which the Times had assured the public was an
"innocent association'--merited an immediate, vigorous and forceful
challenge by a newspaper with the stature and prestige of the Times.

Such a challenge to the Pope's statements, and a full exposition of
Masonry's secret activities, was further warranted in view of the then
current controversy in the CJnited States over sectarianism in the
schools, and the Pope's charge that Freemasonry "endeavors to take
to itself the education of youth."

Masonic Influence In APA

Curiously, however, the Times never published even a brief
excerpt of the encyclical, nor did it mention the subject again.

Nevertheless, the Papal indictment of Masonry was partially
confirmed three years later when a new Know-Nothing secret society
with Masonic ties captured the nation's allegiance, and intensified the
war against the Church and Catholic education.

The new secret society, known as the American Protective
Association (APA), was founded on March 13, 1887 at Clinton, Iowa
by Henry Francis Bowers and six other men.

Bowers was "an enthusiastic Mason, a member of the Blue Lodge
and the thirty-second degree of the Scottish rite." He insisted that the
American Republic "was founded by Masons against the wishes of
Rome." Moreover, he viewed the APA as an offspring of Masonry,
"protecting the republican institutions the Masons had established."^®
Cementing the APA's bond to Masonry were life insurance policies
on members of the former organization guaranteed by the Knights
Templar and the Masons' Life Indemnity Company of Chicago.®®

The APA's statement of principles said membership in the

78

Catholic Church "is irreconcilable with American citizenship," and
that the organization was opposed "to the holding of offices in
National, State, or Municipal government by any subject or supporter
of such ecclesiastical power."

Another principle of the group was that religious liberty did not
mean "any un-American ecclesiastical power can claim absolute
control over the education of children growing up under the Stars and
Stripes."®^

That latter principle had been identified as integral to Masonry by
Pope Leo Xlll in his Encyclical Humanum Genus, three years prior to
the founding of the APA.®^

Initiates into this secret Masonically influenced order bound
themselves to secrecy and took a solemn oath not to allow Catholics
to enter the organization. They also swore never to employ a Catholic
when a Protestant was available; and never to vote for or advocate a
Catholic candidate for public office.®®

Washington Gladden, in a 1894 issue of the Century Magazine,
said the APA's proscription of Catholics for public office enjoins its
members "to violate the first principle of American constitutional
liberty, which forbids discrimination against men on account of their
religious belief," in that the Constitution declares "no religious test
shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust
under the CJnited States."®"^

Gladden also told how the APA circulated a false encyclical of
Pope Leo Xlll, which purported to assert that the CJnited States
belongs to him, and that CJ.S. citizens holding federal office or in the
military are absolved from their oath of allegiance to their country.

The false document also said the Pope was to take "forcible
possession" of the CJnited States, and "it will be the duty of the faithful
to exterminate all heretics found within the jurisdiction of the CJnited
States." (Emphasis in original).®®

That document and similar false statements relating to the
Church, including a variety of alleged "oaths of papal leaders and
garbled extracts of Catholic writings," were "used as campaign
literature all over the land, in all manner of publications, and . . .their
genuineness has been editorially asserted and defended in the organs
of the order."®®

Additionally, there were tales of consignments of arms being sent
to rectories all over the country, as Catholics drilled for war
preparations in the basements of their churches. Yet, not a single
instance of such wild imaginings, presented as facts, was ever
corroborated.®^

79

According to The New York Times, the APA was circulating a
"Devils Catechism" in 1894, which purported to be a series of
answers taken from canon laws and other authoritative statements of
the Catholic Church.

Typical questions and answers were the following:

Q. 1 infer from your argument that the Papal Government
is laying its plans to obtain possession of the CJnited States for
the purpose of restoring the Roman hierarchy?

A. Undoubtedly.

Q. Then it is the policy of the Roman Church to destroy
the Government of the CJnited States--as it presently exists, by
legislation--not by force?

A. By legislation, if possible; but, should legislation prove
ineffectual or too tardy for the accomplishment of the object,
then a resort to force has already been amply provided for.®®

Commenting on the "Catechism," the Times said the questions
and answers were "manufactured out of whole cloth," but the APA
"conspirators have become so accustomed to issuing forged
documents that they make very little of this."

The Times further asserted: "It is with such material as this that
the APA is arousing the 'noble American sentiment.' "®®

The New York newspaper tied the APA to the Republican Party by
noting: "Here in New York . . .not a single active Republican politician
has been found who would speak out against the APA . .

While the Times rightly viewed the APA as an anti-Catholic
extremist organization, it looked favorably upon the National League
for the Protection of American Institutions (NLPAl), a high-powered
lobby group which favored most of the restrictions on Catholic
religious freedom advanced by the APA. In fact, the League was
sometimes referred to as an "upper class APA."

Founded in 1889, its platform was "to secure constitutional and
legislative safeguards for the protection of the common school
system . . .and to prevent all sectarian or denominational

appropriations of public funds.

Rev. Thomas J. Morgan, a member of the Board of Managers of
the League and Commissioner of Indian Affairs during the
Administration of President Benjamin Harrison, explained to the
Times the fundamental problem facing Catholics in America: they
hold different views on the Christian religion. Morgan said:

80

"The Protestants are divided into numerous friendly divisions,
agreeing to the great essentials of religious beliefs, but differing on
minor points."®^

Morgan was an ordained Baptist minister, and had served two
terms as vice-president of the National Education Association (NEA).
He had a reputation as being anti-Catholic.®^

The Executive Secretary of the League was Rev. James M. King,
pastor of the Onion Methodist Church in New York City.

Honorary Vice Presidents of the organization included the well
known writer, James Fenimore Cooper; David Starr Jordan, president
of Stanford Oniversity; and Joseph Medill, owner and publisher of the
Chicago Tribune, and a major influence in founding the Republican
Party. Allegedly, he gave the Party its name.

Other members included such men of stature as Henry Holt,
publisher; Henry C. Lea, historian; J. Pierpont Morgan, financier; Levi
P. Morton, financier, and Vice President of the CJnited States under
President Benjamin Harrison; George L. Putnam, publisher; John D.
Rockefeller, businessman and financier; Russell Sage, financier and
founder of Western Onion Telegraph; Charles Scribner, publisher;
Cornelius Vanderbilt, railroad magnate; and Henry Villard, railroad
magnate and founder of General Electric Company.®'^

The APA and the League (the latter just being organized at the
time) were largely responsible for pushing through Congress the
Enabling Act of 1889. That law required the Omnibus States admitted
into the Onion at that time to include in their Constitutions prohibitions
on expenditure of public money for "sectarian" purposes.

The Omnibus States admitted that year were Montana, North
Dakota, New Mexico, South Dakota, Otah and Washington.®^

Typical of the tenor of debate on the issue was the following
commentary by Mr. Medill's Chicago Tribune:

Montana and Washington do not include or base their
claim [for Statehood] upon their Indian population, but upon
their American and white inhabitants. It is not right that new
Mexico should enumerate her ignorant, mongrel, foreign¬
speaking Greasers in order to qualify on a representative
basis for admission.

Five days earlier, the Tribune had referred to New Mexicans as
"weak, stagnant, mentally childish, unproductive rubbish, wretched
and imbecile."®®

81

The Congressional mandate to the Omnibus States was the first
time the federal government took a position against "sectarian"
institutions. However, the word "sectarian" was never defined by the
Act.

Certainly, as will be demonstrated, it was not the intention of
Congress nor the League that the government should divorce itself
from supporting and encouraging the advancement of Christianity. In
fact, for the 312 years immediately prior to 1870, Indian education in
this country was under the direction of religious missionary
organizations. Then, in the late 19th Century, the federal government
especially invited religious denominations to build schools for the
Indians.®^

However, the success of Catholic missionaries in educating the
Indians apparently incited concern by the APA and the League. In
1891, for example. Catholic Indian missions received $356,957 from
the federal government while all other religious organizations
combined received only $204,993.

The League, particularly, began petitioning Congress in 1889 to
terminate "sectarian appropriations . . .for Indian education," while at
the same time it prevailed upon Protestant organizations to withdraw
from the Indian education program. Soon, the Catholic missionaries
were the only "sectarian" groups involved in the effort.

Those efforts by the League made the Indian school policy an
"issue" in the election of 1892. Some felt that a perception of anti-
Catholicism in President Benjamin Harrison's Indian education
program, under Rev. Thomas Morgan, resulted in Harrison's defeat by
Grover Cleveland.

The APA, meanwhile, hung onto the coattails of the League's
efforts to end "sectarian appropriations," and was able to gain
additional adherents.^®

By that time, the APA had a new leader, William J. Traynor, a
Mason, a member of the Independent Order of Good Templars,
Deputy Grand Master of the Grand Orange Lodge of the Clnited States,
and a member of the Illustrious Order of the Knights of Malta.

The State of Washington had the largest per capita membership
(115,000 members in a total population of 395,589) - -29 percent of the
State's population. The APA State president, George Washington Van
Fossen, was a Mason and organizer of the local Orange lodges.

In June, 1897, The New York Times, commenting on House
debate on an appropriations bill for Indians, noted that Congressman
William S. Linton (R., Ml) had lashed out at Catholics "who are
engaged in educating the Indians, in schools which the Government

82

has encouraged, with money that has, according to witnesses who are
qualified to speak, been better expended than most of the money
spent on other denominational schools.

Linton, a Mason and APA supporter, had expressed concern that
Catholic Indian Schools received approximately one-half more
federal funding than all Protestant Indian Schools combined.

In rebuttal. Representative Thomas A. Weadock (D., Ml) said the
Catholic schools received more money because they were instructing
a far greater number of pupils than the other religious organizations.
The Michigan Democrat then observed that the APA "holds the
balance of power" in all Congressional Districts. He also called
attention to APA oaths which are directed toward denying Catholic
citizens public office.

Representative John Gear (R., I A) offered an amendment to cut
off funds for education in "sectarian" schools. However, that motion
became embroiled in an uproar over who was pressing for such an
amendment. Finally, in response to cries for Gear to read a petition to
Congress from the National League for the Protection of American
Institutions, which called for the cut-off of such funds, the League's
petition, together with a list of all of its officers and supporters, was
inserted in the Record.

CJltimately the House passed the legislation without the
amendments.

"Sectarian" Means "Non-Protestant"

Although the term "sectarian" was not defined during that House
debate. Rev. King of the League defined the term in his book. Facing
The Twentieth Century. He wrote:

Sectarianism is defined to be: "the quality or character of
a sectarian; adherence to a separate religious denomination."

We have no established state church in the European
sense, in this country . . .

Protestant is not the name of a sect . . . An institution or
government may be Protestant and therefore not Roman
Catholic, but it is not necessarily sectarian because its
managers are Protestant, and it need not be sectarian
because the majority of its managers are Roman Catholic.^®®

Rev. King, who, it has been shown, was singularly active in

83

working for legislation which ultimately terminated public assistance
for "sectarian" institutions, made it abundantly clear that he was
strongly in favor of the government supporting his principles of Anglo-
Saxon Christianity.

He wrote that while "sectarianism cannot become . . .the molder
and conservator of our civilization, sectarian controversies ought not
to be allowed to crowd out universal instruction in the unsectarian
tenets and moral and religious principles of Christianity."

Continuing, he said: "The American civilization and free
institutions rest upon unrestricted Christianity. A Hindoo writer puts it
thus: 'The religion of Christ represents all that is noble in Western
civilization. Western morality, science or faith.'

Christianized Anglo-Saxon blood, said King, "is the regnant force
in this country; and . . .God is using the Anglo-Saxon to conquer the
world for Christ by dispossessing feebler races and assimilating and
molding others."^®®

All religions, he declared, "must have absolute liberty, restrained
only when they antagonize the principles of our Christian
civilization.

King's view of the preferred position of Anglo-Saxon Protestantism
in America was evidenced during House debate on the District of
Columbia Appropriations bill in February, 1896.

Discussion on the floor developed that St. Ann's Infant Asylum,
the Association of Works of Mercy, the House of the Good Shepherd,
St. Rose Industrial School and St. Joseph's Asylum were considered
"sectarian," because they were operated by members of religious
orders of the Roman Catholic Church.

At the same time, the House approved use of public funds for the
Young Women's Christian Home (YWCH) and the Hope and Help
Mission (HHM).

With regard to the latter organization, its report showed that "at
least 14 women and girls have been clearly converted during the last
six months, and the aggregate of the year is at least 25." It also was
admitted that all board members represented several Protestant
denominations.

Addressing those facts about the HHM, Representative Joseph
Cannon (R., IL) asked: " . . .if it is not a religious institution, then what
is it?"^

Responding, Rep. William W. Grout (R., VT) said: "1 do not
understand the word 'Protestant' indicates a sect. 1 do not so
understand at all ..."

Congressman Elijah A. Morse (R., MA) rose in defense of funding

84

the Protestant Hope and Help Mission. He said he agreed with his
Republican colleague Grout, "in regard to what constitutes
sectarianism."

"Surely," he said, "any institution supported by the different
denominations of this country is not a sectarian institution."^

Later in that debate. Rep. John S. Williams (D., MS) wanted to
know why appropriations were denied for Catholic organizations, but
not denied to the Woman's Christian Association. He challenged the
view that the WCA was not a "sectarian" institution by noting that no
Jewish woman could belong, "by its very terms, and certainly no
Catholic could consistently belong to it."

Rep. Morse replied: "The Women's Christian Temperance
Association includes every Protestant Denomination, and it is entirely
nonsectarian." ^ ^ ^

When the Indian Appropriations Bill came before the Senate, in
April, 1896, and debate ensued on an amendment to declare a settled
policy to "make no appropriation whatever for the education of Indian
children in any sectarian school," Sen. William V. Allen (Populist, NE)
expressed concern about the infelicitous references to the Catholic
Church during floor debate.

in connection with the amendment and the debate thereon, the
Nebraska Senator demonstrated remarkable courage and decency by
addressing his colleagues with the following remarks:

1 was in hopes that the time had passed in this country
when sectarian bigotry would make its appearance in the
Congress of the CJnited States, and when any man could be
moved to give utterance to sentiments that possibly he is not
willing to express on all occasions in consequence of the
particular or peculiar political situation existing at this time.

1 am not a Catholic. 1 am the son of a Protestant minister.
Whatever religious education 1 have came from Protestant
parents and teachers. But 1 supposed the time had come . .
.when no man is to be arraigned in this country in
consequence of his religious faith, and when every man and
woman may be permitted to worship God according to the
dictates of his or her own conscience without being arraigned
or charged with entertaining a belief that is hostile to the
perpetuity of American institutions and American freedom.

1 know of no organization that has done more to bring
about civilization in this country than the Catholic Church. 1
am not its advocate; 1 am not a member of it; and 1 cannot say

85

that I have any more sympathy with it than I have for any
other church. In fact, my sympathies go out to the church of
my father and mother.

[But] when the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock they
found the missionaries of this church scattered among the
barbarous tribes of this country. They had preceded the
landing of the Pilgrims and the landing of the immigrants at
Jamestown. They were carrying the Gospel among the
heathen of this country; they were devoted to the work of
civilizing and bringing the Gospel of Christ to the uncivilized
tribes inhabiting this country.

We may disagree, as to church creeds, as to church
government; we may disagree as to the proper construction to
be placed upon certain passages of the Scriptures; but we
certainly cannot disagree upon the question that the time has
come in this country . . .when no man is to be proscribed,
directly or indirectly, in consequence of any religious faith he
may entertain.

The amendment passed by a vote of 38 to 24, with 27 Senators not
voting.

Senator Allen was defeated in the next election.

Those prohibitions on aid to "sectarian" institutions were legislated
at a time when Michigan Congressman William Linton referred to the
election of 1894 as the "storm of 1894" which had precipitated a
"flood of ballots" that "swept members out of office for having voted
such appropriations."^

Linton, a staunch Mason and APA supporter, was referring
primarily to federal funding for Indian education of Catholic
missionary societies.

At the same time, the Mason President of the APA, William
Traynor, bragged that a sufficient number of APA supporters had been
elected to the 54th Congress to insure passage of legislation "most
dear to us."^^^

Among measures "dear" to the APA at that time were proposals to
prohibit aid to "sectarian" institutions, either for education of Indian
children or to support charitable organizations in the District of
Columbia which the APA would view as "sectarian."

That is the legislative history which established the meaning of
"sectarianism." The term really meant "non-Protestant, when
Congress first terminated public funding for "sectarian" institutions.

86

It is also worthy of note that the word "sectarian" was not defined
in various acts which prohibited aid for such organizations or
institutions at that time.^^^

The religion clause of the First Amendment, of course, makes no
reference to "sectarian." It addresses the subject of "religion."

Meanwhile, during this period, the CJ.S. Catholic bishops were
concerned about secret societies, but the prelates were reluctant to
condemn such groups because of the general anti-Catholic climate of
the time.

However, in 1892, the bishops of New York and Philadelphia did
condemn the Odd Fellows, Knights of Pythias, Knights Templar, and
Sons of Temperance.

At the same time, Fr. Aloysius Sabetti, a noted Jesuit theologian at
Woodstock College in Maryland, sent to James Cardinal Gibbons of
Baltimore, the Archbishop Primate of the United States, a study on
secret societies by an American Jesuit colleague which found that no
secret society, except the Freemasons, should be condemned unless
it was proven that they worked against Church and State.^

The study was circulated among American bishops and forwarded
to Rome for a decision. Two years later, the Vatican directed that the
Odd Fellows, the Knights of Pythias, and the Sons of Temperance be
condemned; however, the CJ.S. bishops chose to ignore the directive.
In early December, 1894, Rome ordered the Cl.S. prelates to
comply.^

Rome's attitude was not surprising. This was a period when the
Church was concerned with an incipient heresy known as
"Americanism," or a belief that the Church should alter its teachings
on faith and morals to better allow Catholics in the United States to
conform to the world in which they lived.

That situation moved Pope Leo XIII to send a letter to Cardinal
Gibbons on the subject of Americanism, titled Testem Benevolentiae,
dated January 31, 1899.

Essentially, the Papal letter condemned five specific errors held
by many Church liberals in the States: rejection of external spiritual
direction from the Vatican; preference for natural over supernatural
virtues; rejection of religious vows as incompatible with the modern
world; confounding license with liberty; and an unwarranted
assumption that people in the modern era have received a greater
outpouring of the Holy Spirit than did the Apostles, saints, and the
faithful of earlier periods.

That was the situation as the 20th Century began.

87

Attacks on Catholics abated, but never ceased; there was only a
lull in the battle, although the federal government made no other
significant efforts to proscribe Catholic institutions or activities.

However, the ferocity of the war against the Church intensified
after William J. Simmons re-established the Ku Klux Klan at Stone
Mountain, Georgia in 1915.

And from the Klan's putrescent swamp emerged a man who,
arguably, played the most significant role of all in reversing the
nation's long established policy of accommodating both traditional
Trinitarian Christian beliefs and Old Testament convictions.

88

4/ THE CRAFT AND THE KLAN

By the early 20th Century, attacks on Catholics had waned, and
did not resume until shortly after Jews and Freemasons were singled
out as threats to the nation.

First, it was charged in Congressional testimony that Jews were
closely identified with Bolshevism and anarchism. Then, almost
simultaneously, history's most distorted plagiarism. The Protocols of
the Learned Elders of Zion, purported to reveal how Jews and
Freemasons were conspiring to overthrow Christian Civilization as a
prelude to joint world rule.

Prior to that bizarre imbroglio--which, it should be noted, never
came close to exciting the hatred and bloodshed reserved for
Catholics--the Church was gaining respect and adherents. Census
data demonstrated that it accounted for over one-third of all members
of religious denominations in the CJnited States.^

in 1911, President William Howard Taft remarked that membership
in the Roman Catholic Church is "assurance" of patriotic citizenship.
The following year, the President's sister-in-law, Mrs. H.W. Taft, was
received into the Catholic Church.^

The Klan Moves North

Three years later. Colonel William J. Simmons, an ardent admirer
of the Ku Klux Klan of 1866-1869, under the leadership of
Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest, re-established the Klan
at Atlanta, Georgia in 1915, and called himself the Imperial Wizard.

According to a handbill he issued in 1917, titled "The ABC of the
Knights of the Ku Klux Klan" (available in the Rare Book Division of
the Library of Congress), the Klan advocated white supremacy, and
was open only to "native born American citizens who believe in the
tenets of the Christian religion." That viewpoint was strikingly similar
to the philosophy of the Know-Nothings and the APA of previous
periods.

A year earlier, it was apparent that a resuscitated Know-Nothing
movement was taking nourishment in the North. The New York Times
reported that a "secret oath-bound anti-Catholic order" (which refused

89

to divulge its name) was operating in New York City as part of a
nationwide group organized specifically to oppose "political
encroachments" by the Roman Catholic Church. The group's
spokesman, Rev. William Hess, Pastor of Trinity Congregational
Church, alleged that the Catholic Church intended to make the CJnited
States a "Catholic" country and planned to "get control of the
government."

Later that year, dissension arose in the organization's ranks and
resulted in the New York adjunct separating itself from the national
body.^

Although the group was extremely reticent about publicity, one of
its spokesmen bragged to the Times that it had been successful in
efforts to defeat Martin H. Glen, candidate for Governor in the Empire
State in 1914, because "he represented the Jesuit element" in
American politics.'^

In 1920, the Sons and Daughters of Washington, a group which
bore an uncanny resemblance to the unidentified 1916 anti-Catholic
organization, was formed in Brooklyn, New York to oppose Catholic
political activities. It was characterized in the press as "a militant
fighting organization for Protestantism."

The august and powerful Times did not disagree with the goals of
the Sons and Daughters of Washington, but faulted the organization for
its egregious lack of tact. An editorial in that newspaper said the Sons
and Daughters "show none of the discretion that characterized him
whose name they have taken."

Hammering home the point, the Times said: "Only a minute
fraction of it [l.e., discretion] would have enabled them to see that the
war [World War 1] is not yet remote enough to make attacks on the
Knights of Columbus more than the forlornest of hopes. Our soldiers
are under the impression that the Knights served them certainly as
well as did any other agency of relief and support, and better than did
several."^

Jews Attacked

But Catholics were not the sole targets of hatred. Jews were
singled out for attack during the period 1919-1921.

Opposition to Jews developed as pressure built up in the United
States to support a Zionist nation in Palestine for Jews who had been
displaced by the Russian Revolution and World War I. The issue split
the Jewish community itself.

90

Congressman Julius Kahn of California, for example, objected to
President Woodrow Wilson's endorsement of an independent Jewish
state in Palestine, principally, the Congressman said, because it
incites "the division of one's affiliation with the country in which he
lives," and creates "a divided allegiance." Kahn also said he was
opposed to Zionists because they "believe in the foundation of a
government which shall embrace both Church and State."®

At the same time. Rev. Dr. George S. Simons, who had been
Superintendent of the Methodist Episcopal Church in Russia and
Finland for the preceding 12 years, testified before a Senate
committee investigating Bolshevism in 1919, and charged that
chaotic conditions in Russia were due in large part to agitators from
the East Side of New York City who flocked to Russia immediately
after the overthrow of the Czar.

The Methodist minister said that some of the New York people in
Russia held high positions in the Bolshevist government, and that
Bolshevists were responsible for wholesale murder of innocent
civilians, outraging of young girls, and official starving of all who did
not endorse Bolshevist teachings.

He identified those Bolshevists as "Yiddish agitators from the New
York East Side," and "apostate Jews, men who deny their God, and
who have forsaken the religion and the teachings of their fathers."

His information was, he said, that 265 members of the Bolshevist
Government "had come into Russia . . .from the East Side of New
York."

Rev. Simons also testified that "a large percentage of the
Bolshevist agitators at work over here [the United States] are apostate
Jews."^

Two days later, Louis Marshall, President of the American Jewish
Committee, testified before the Senate committee. He confirmed that
some Bolshevists were apostate Jews, but complained that Rev.
Simons' statement was damaging to other Jews who opposed
Bolshevism.®

in New York, Jewish leaders complained that two Episcopal
Church clerics had charged that members of the Jewish race were in
need of Americanization and Christianization, it was alleged that Rev.
John L. Zacker had told an Episcopal convention: "The Jews control
the world, and if Christianity is to convert the Jews, it must be
attempted at once."^

Rev. Thomas Burgess, Secretary of Christian Americanization of
the Episcopal Church, replied that his Church's program was directed
toward all "foreign born," including the "large number of Jews who

91

have left the faith of their fathers."^®

A little over one year later, Rabbis Joseph Silverman and Samuel
Schulman condemned anti-Semitic attacks in various publications in
the CJnited States which were based on The Protocols of the Learned
Elders of Zion. They said The Protocols allege that Jews and
Freemasons "are in a great conspiracy to achieve world mastery."
Among the publications cited by the Rabbis was auto magnate Henry
Ford's Dearborn Independent, which had been serializing The
Protocols for six months.

Dr. Silverman rightly pointed out that none of the publications
furnished any evidence that an international secret political
organization of Jews actually exists.

Continuing, he said anti-Semites "collect a few Jewish names,
like Karl Marx, Bela Kun, Herezl, Trotzky and others, and cull a few
sentences of their writings, divorced from their contexts," to show that
Jews "are individualists. Socialists, Bolsheviki, Zionists and what not,
who care only for the overthrow of all Governments in order to
establish their own."

But, he observed, such people ignore the fact that the Zionists,
Socialists and Bolsheviki "who happen to carry Jewish names, are
only a handful in comparison to the great bulk of Jewish people
throughout the world who are not only not in sympathy with Zionism,
Socialism, Bolshevism, but who actually denounce these attempts at
separate forms of government."

The Rabbi declared that there never would be a Jewish nation or a
Jewish army or navy with which to dominate the world, "in no nation
of the world is there a Jewish vote," Dr. Silverman asserted.

Henry Ford was attacked repeatedly for his publication of The
Protocols.Editorializing against The Protocols, the Times said they
were "about the strangest jumble of crazy ideas that ever found its
way into print."

The editorial added that The Protocols are of "unknown origin and
accounted for only as having been put into the hands of the Russian
Nilus by an unknown lady who obtained them 'in a mysterious way' . .
m14

The Conference of Jews issued a public statement on November
30, 1920 condemning The Protocols, and characterized them as "a
mere recrudescence of medieval bigotry and stupidity." ^ ^

Princess Catherine Radziwill, a Russian emigre writer who
specialized in Russian and European matters, said she had seen the
manuscript for The Protocols when it was being fabricated in 1884 by
General Orgewsky, head of the Third Section of Police of the Russian

92

State Department.

The General, she related, had sent agents to Paris to prepare the
fake documentation which would show that the Jews were responsible
for assassinating Alexander 11, and "were planning a general
conspiracy to destroy all the monarchies of the earth."

Continuing, she said the Czar's agents had "searched old books,
compiled citations from Jewish philosophers, and ransacked the
records of the French Revolution for abstracts of the most
inflammatory speeches."^®

As it turned out, the Princess's recollection appeared to be
accurate.

On May 8, 1920, there appeared in The Times (London) an article
"From A Correspondent" which called attention to a book. The Jewish
Peril, Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, by Professor S. Nilus.
The correspondent called for an investigation of the book because it
fostered "indiscriminate anti-Semitism . . .rampant in Eastern
Europe," and "growing in France, England and America.

Fifteen months later. The Times' Constantinople correspondent
reported that The Protocols--which purported to evidence a Jewish-
Masonic conspiracy to destroy Christian Civilization by a universal
revolution which would usher in Jewish world-rule--were a
plagiarism. The newspaper article clearly demonstrated that Nilus's
work was based largely on a book. Dialogue aux Enters entre
Machiavel et Montesquieu ou la Politique de Machiavel au XIX Siecle
("Dialogue in Hell between Machiavelli and Montesquieu, or the
Politics of Machiavelli in the XIX Century").

The book, published at Brussels, Belgium in 1865, had been
authored by a person identified on the title page as "un
Contemporain" ("a contemporary") but actually was Maurice Joly, a
Parisian lawyer and publicist, who had been arrested by Napoleon ill's
police and sentenced to 18 months imprisonment.^®

The Brussels book was "a very thinly veiled attack on the
despotism of Napoleon ill in the form of 26 dialogues divided into four
parts," and The Protocols attributed to Nilus follow almost the
identical order as the "Dialogues" of Joly.^®

Whereas the book by the Russian mystic Sergi Nilus was shown
conclusively to be a plagiarism, many people obviously insist on
continuing the controversy, as is evidenced by approximately 100
books concerning The Protocols (pro and con), in several languages,
listed in the card catalogue of the Library of Congress.

93

New York World Exposes Klan Anti-Catholicism

Exposure of the Protocols forgery pretty well ended serious anti-
Semitism, although there were occasional attacks on Jews in such
organs as The Searchlight, a Klan-influenced journal, which lashed
out at "Jewish agitators" who were plotting a race war to destroy the
Government, and "to overthrow all the Gentile governments of the
world.

But the motherlode which provided the Klan's enormous
membership and great wealth was the historic American hatred of the
Catholic Church. This was first evidenced in a series of 21 articles
which began in the New York World on September 6, 1921, following
the World's three-months' investigation of the Klan. The series
simultaneously appeared in 17 other major dailies throughout the
nation.

The first article in the series reported on the Klan's terrorism in
the South, largely against Negroes. The Klan was exposed for having
been involved in 21 tar and featherings; 25 beatings of individuals; 2
strippings and maltreatment of white women; 3 killings; and 18
warnings to prospective victims of Klan wrath.

The series also reproduced a copy of a bogus oath which the Klan
said was the actual oath taken by Fourth Degree members of the
Knights of Columbus. The bogus oath began:

"1 _, now in the presence of Almighty God, the

Blessed Virgin Mary, the Blessed St. John the Baptist, the
Holy Apostles, St. Peter and St. Paul . . .and to you, my
Ghostly Father, the superior general of the Society of Jesus . .
.declare and swear that His Holiness, the Pope . . .hath power
to depose heretical kings, princes. States, Commonwealths
and Governments, and they may be safely destroyed ..."

The fabricated oath further says the 4th Degree Knight will "wage
relentless war, openly and secretly, against all heretics, Protestants
and Masons . . .and that 1 will hang, burn, waste, boil, flay, strangle and
bury alive those infamous heretics; rip up the stomachs and wombs of
their women and crash their infants' heads against the walls in order
to annihilate their execrable race."

Continuing, the unbelievable document said the Knights would
also wage war "secretly" using "the poisonous cup, the strangulation
cord, the steel of the poinard, or the leaden bullet..."

Should the Knight prove false, the fake oath says he agrees to

94

have his brethren "cut off my hands and feet and my throat from ear
to ear, my belly opened and sulphur burned therein ..."

The Knight then allegedly states that he will always prefer a
Catholic to any other political candidate, especially a Mason.

Immediately following the fabricated text is a statement that the
oath appeared in the Congressional Record on February 15, 1913 at
page 3216.^^

The World also set forth the real oath taken by Fourth Degree
Knights, which is shown to be virtually the exact opposite of what the
Klan libelously charged.

The true oath taken by members of the 4th Degree of the Knights
of Columbus asserts:

"1 swear to support the Constitution of the Clnited States. 1
pledge myself, as a Catholic citizen and Knight of Columbus,
to enlighten myself fully upon my duties as a citizen and to
conscientiously perform such duties entirely in the interest of
my country and regardless of all personal consequences."

The Knight further pledges to preserve "purity of the ballot" and to
"promote reverence and respect for law and order," and to practice
his religion openly and to exercise public virtue "as to reflect nothing
but credit upon our Holy Church . .

Moreover, in 1914, the "entire work, ceremonies and pledges of
the Knights of Columbus were submitted to a Masonic Committee of
the 32nd and 33rd degree Masons in California." Afterward, the
Committee issued a statement certifying that the Knights' oaths were
"intended to teach and inculcate principles that lie at the foundation of
every great religion and every great State."

The Masonic Committee further stated that the alleged oath "is
scurrilous, wicked and libelous, and might be the invention of an
impious and venomous mind."^^

Actually, anyone who was the least bit familiar with the solemn
oaths taken by Masons would suspect that the bogus Knights of
Columbus oath had been written by a Mason. Such suspicion would
have been well founded.

On September 18, 1921, an article in The World was headlined:
"Bogus K. of C. Oath An Old Plagiarism."

The article said the bogus Fourth Degree K. of C. oath circulated
by the Klan is nearly identical in wording to an "oath first used by the
Paris Illuminati, as they were called in 1768--the name being
changed to Adepts in 1772 and Freemasons in 1778."

95

Continuing, the article said: "It was delivered in a cellar, back of a
house in Rue Vaugirard in Paris, first in 1772, in a lodge attended by
Jean Jacques Rousseau . . . Prince Louis Philippe . . . Jean Paul Marat
. . . John Paul Jones, Emanuel Swedenborg and other conspirators,
and was dictated by the celebrated charlatan Cagliostro . . .

The World article added: "The irony of the matter is that the K.K.K.
assumes the oath to be of Roman Catholic origin and against the
Masons, whereas it really is of Masonic origin against the Roman
hierarchy and the French monarchy."^^

The series of articles also likened the Klan to the APA. One article
was headlined: "Ku Klux Klan As Venomous As The Old APA." The
report concerned the "virulent attacks on Catholics and their Church"
used by the Klan in recruitment efforts, particularly a "Do You Know?"
card on which were listed such questions as:

"That a secret treaty made by him [the Pope] started
[World War Ij? . . .

"That he controls the daily and magazine press?

"That he denounces popular government as inherently
vicious . . .?

"That Knights of Columbus [members] declare they will
make popery dominant in the CJ.S.?"^®

The Klan's concern for the good name of Freemasonry hinted at
Masonic influence in the Ku Klux Klan. Certainly the bogus K. of C.
oath was shown to have been of 18th-century Masonic origin.

Therefore, it was ironic that The World was worried about the
Klan's secret oath, which demanded "unconditional obedience to the
as yet unknown constitution and laws, regulations . . .of the Knights of
the Ku Klux Klan ..."

The World also was disturbed by the "rigid secrecy" imposed upon
Klan members "even in the face of death, in regard to any and all
matters and knowledge" of the Klan.

The New York daily said it "has always in mind the potential
danger to the CJnited States from a secret organization bound together
by such an oath . . .and likely to draw into its ranks men of no regard
for anything but the Ku Klux law and standards of conduct and
ethics.

The Craft And The Klan

96

What The World deplored about the Klan's "rigid secrecy," and the
danger to society of men binding themselves by solemn oaths to
accept or commit possible actions in the future which they were
totally ignorant of when they took their oaths, is precisely the danger
the Catholic Church always has seen in Freemasonry.

Indeed, it is remarkable that after three months' investigation by
one of the nation's major newspapers, the 21-part series made no
mention of the close bond between the Klan and Freemasonry.

After all, most of the Klan's major leaders were Freemasons. The
organization's founder. Col. Simmons, was a Mason, and a Knight
Templar. Also, C. Anderson Wright, King Kleagle of the New York Klan
and chief of staff of a Klan group known as Knights of the Air, was a
32nd degree Mason. Dr. Hiram Evans, who succeeded Simmons as
Imperial Wizard, "for many years . . .was recognized as one of the
most active men in Masonry, and is a 32nd degree Knight
Commander of the Court of Honor. . . [who] had been devoting almost
his entire time to Scottish Rite Masonry at the time the Klan was
organized ..."

Israel Zangwill, a prominent London author, said he was told by a
Jewish rabbi that Dr. Evans had inducted him into the 32nd degree of
the Masonic order.^®

Further, initiations were held "in the Masonic Temple in New York
City," and the Klan shared office space in Beaumont, Texas "with the
secretary of the Grotto, which, in a way, is a Masonic organization."^®

Edward Young Clarke, a former publicity agent and fund raiser,
who became Imperial Kleagle (salesman) for the Klan, "realized the
value of representing the Klan to be 'the fighting brother' of Masonry."
Consequently, he issued orders that "none but men with Masonic
affiliations" should be employed as Kleagles in the Klan's nationwide
sales network.

Accordingly, he established the Great American Fraternity (GAF)
in Georgia in 1920 as a nationwide sales organization composed of
members of 13 secret societies believed to be hostile to the Catholic
Church. Klan salesmen were instructed "in selling effective political
anti-Catholicism to their brothers in their respective lodges."

Members of the GAF included the Freemasons, Junior Order of
United American Mechanics, Independent Order of Odd Fellows,
Guardians of Liberty, Order of the Eastern Star, Daughters of America,
Rebekkahs, the Loyal Orange Institution, Knights of Luther, National
Legion of Pathfinders, and the Order of De Molay.®®

Although some Masonic spokesmen condemned the Klan, there
were very few Masonic leaders who shared that view.

97

Charles P. Sweeney, writing in The Nation magazine in 1920, said
that if responsible Masons "exerted a tithe of the influence they
possess, [they] could do more to stop the Know-Nothing program than
any other single force.

Imperial Wizard Simmons denied the authenticity of a report that
the Masonic leadership in Missouri had condemned the Klan in 1920.
He said he had addressed 3,500 people in the Shrine Temple at St.
Louis in September of that year, and learned that the alleged Masonic
condemnation "has been strongly denied.

The Minneapolis Daily Star reported that most Klansmen in the
city were Masons, while the State leaders included many popular
Shriners.

In Wisconsin, the Klan leader was William Wiesemann, "a local
insurance man who was prominent in Masonic circles."

Klan advertisements read: "Masons Preferred," and many Masons
joined, as did a number of Milwaukee's Socialists.

A New York Klansman claimed that 75 percent of the Klan
enrollment in that State were Masons.

In Oregon, both Fred L. Gifford, head of the Klan in that State, and
his secretary, Frank Parker, were Masons. Delegates of an Oregon
Klan front, the Good Government League, were Masons, Orangemen,
Odd Fellows and Pythians.^"^

In 1924, an editorial in the Scottish Rite New Age magazine said
the Rite holds "no brief for or against any organization outside of the
Scottish Rite," and added the following observation: If Freemasonry
follows the traditions of centuries, it "cannot dictate to any Mason what
shall or shall not be his affiliations outside the lodge ..."

The editorial then invited attention to a letter by the editor of the
Masonic Herald that had appeared in The New York Times on August
28, 1923. The letter said "genuine Masons--Masons who are such in
their hearts--cannot be Klansmen, and cannot welcome with true
brotherly love Klansmen into their lodges."

Commenting on the Herald editor's letter, the New Age said:
"Possibly the editor of the Masonic Herald is prejudiced, but no
Masonic editor has any more right to speak pontifically for the
Masonic fraternity than [a Catholic priest].

An article in the same publication commented: "One may not
subscribe to the Ku Klux Klan platforms in toto, but one may say of
these and similar anti-Catholic movements . . .this fellow hath the
right sow by the ear."^®

Although most decent citizens were outraged by the Klan's
rampant bigotry, none of the Craft's Grand Lodges had taken "official

98

action in regard to the Klan."^^

Nationally, "attacks on Masonry" in Italy "fired the Klan to renewed
action and increased [its] membership."^®

The above history strongly indicates that the Klan was a Masonic
front group. Certainly the Klan's venomous war on Catholics was in
keeping with a long tradition generally associated with the Masonic
fraternity.

The Klan In Action

In his article in The Nation, Charles Sweeney listed some of the
terrorism and murders attributed to the Klan:

* A sheriff in Waco, Texas, who stopped a parade of
masked men and demanded the names of the marchers, was
shot and removed from office in proceedings "sponsored by
the most influential citizens of his county."

* In Birmingham, Alabama, a "Klansman" who had killed
a Catholic priest in cold blood on his own doorstep "was
acquitted at the 'trial' amidst the plaudits of the mob."

* In Atlanta, Georgia, members of the Board of Education
received letters threatening their lives when they hesitated to
consider a resolution to dismiss all Catholic public school
teachers.

* In Naperville, Illinois, a Catholic church was destroyed
by fire two hours after a monster midnight Klan initiation in the
neighborhood.

* Imperial Wizard Simmons made clear that the Klan had
"given the world the open Bible, the little red school house, if
you please, the great public school system."®®

The free publicity given to such a militant anti-Catholic
organization by The World's widely publicized articles, coupled with
Imperial Wizard Simmon's testimony before the House Rules
Committee only served to advance the rapid growth of the Klan.

Simmons whetted the insatiable anti-Catholic appetite when he
told the Committee there was available to the Klan "possibly the
greatest existing mass of data and material against the Roman
Catholics and Knights of Columbus." The material included "affidavits
and other personal testimony attributing to the Roman Catholics and
the Knights of Columbus in America more outrages and crimes than

99

the Klan has ever been charged with."

Included in the material, he said, are charges of "murder,
whipping, tar and feathers, and crimes of all natures."^®

At the time the House Rules Committee hearings were underway.
Congressman William CJpshaw, a supporter of the Klan, introduced a
resolution to investigate "each and every secret order in the CJnited
States." Ten days later the Committee called off further investigation
of the Klan."^^

Typical of Klan techniques in the North, in 1922, was an incident
at Elizabeth, New Jersey. Five Klansmen marched into the Third
Presbyterian Church and handed the pastor an envelope in which was
enclosed a note and $25. The note expressed "appreciation" for the
way the deacon's fund was administered by the church, and asserted
that the Klan stood for "white supremacy, protection of women . . .and
separation of church and state."

Five days later, the church's pastor. Rev. Robert W. Mark,
preached a sermon attacking the Knights of Columbus. He remarked
that if he had to choose between joining the K. of C. and the Ku Klux
Klan, he would select the Klan.

Rev. Mark said God intended the white race for leadership, but that
he (Mark) did not advocate suppression of any race. With those
words, he invited Rev. C.J. Turner, Negro pastor of the Siloam
Presbyterian Church, who was sitting in the front row, to Join him on
the platform. The two ministers stood side by side singing

"America. '"^2

Cathophobia (or morbid fear and hatred of the Catholic Church)
was rapidly spreading across the nation. In November, 1923, for
example, Lowell Mellett, a nationally prominent Journalist, writing in
the prestigious Atlantic Monthly magazine, recalled stories circulated
during his boyhood in Indiana which alleged that Catholic youths were
trained "to seize the whole country." The same stories were rampant,
he said, when he returned to his hometown 30 years later.'^^

Mellett said the Klan was charged with being opposed to Jews,
Negroes and Catholics; however, he had heard "little concerning Jews
and Negroes," but "heard much concerning the Catholics." He added:
"Very clearly, the crux of the Klan problem in Indiana is the Catholic
Church.

Some of Mellett's old friends, whom he characterized as "Just
some of the best citizens in Indiana," were Klansmen. They Joined, he
said, because they believed the Vatican "is soon to be moved to
Washington, D.C.," and because they opposed the "fixed policy of the
Church to keep its members down to a definite level of ignorance.

100

One of the most serious charges against the Church, he remarked,
is that it "is endeavoring to obtain control of the public schools.""^®

He charged that newspapers "have feared the Catholic Church,"
and agreed that that was an article of Klan faith which "has a real
basis.

Mellett's answer to the Klan's problem with the Church was to
investigate, not the Klan nor other secret societies which were
viciously attacking the Church and her adherents, but rather to
investigate the Church. Catholic churches, he said, should "be forced
open" to prove or disprove allegations "of buried rifles and
ammunition.'"^®

If adopted, that proposal, and a similar outrageous suggestion by
Mellett, would have trampled the most basic religious and civil rights
of Catholics.

His other suggestion was that a commission of inquiry be
established to "call publicly for the presentation of every charge
against the Catholic Church that any responsible person or group of
persons might have to make, and then investigate the truth of these
charges."^®

Nowhere in the article did Mellett furnish evidence to support
wanton Klan charges. Presumably, this outrageous assault on the
rights of citizens was warranted merely because a group of friends,
"just some of the best citizens in Indiana," thought it would be nice.

Curiously, he never suggested an assault upon the Klan or
Freemasonry. In fact, he explicitly said the Klan and secret societies
should not be investigated. The reality was, however, that abundant
evidence had been presented over the years which detailed the
serious danger emanating from both the Klan and Freemasonry.

Indeed, in the same issue of the Atlantic Monthly in which Mellett's
article appeared, there was a letter from "A Citizen of Oklahoma" who
said the State was under the "secret rule of a hidden clique." He noted
that the civil offices of the State "are unquestionably in the hands of
the Klan; and that fact makes it impossible for the Governor to oust
these officials."

In that regard, the unidentified letter writer observed that the
Governor was being considered for impeachment by the Klan and its
many sympathizers. The Klan, he remarked, "is the most dangerous
force at large in the country today.

Strangely, however, Lowell Mellett was convinced that the Roman
Catholic Church was far more dangerous than the Klan.

By 1925, the Klan was being widely accepted as being as

101

American as apple pie. The Nation editorialized that the Klan "has
become safe--and uninteresting."^^

On August 9, 1925, Imperial Wizard Hiram W. Evans led a march
of some 25,000 Klansmen and Klanswomen down Pennsylvania
Avenue in Washington, D.C., in "their greatest national demonstration
and public show of strength," as 100,000 spectators cheered.

The "100 per cent Americans" knelt with heads bared at the
Washington Monument to pledge allegiance to "one country, one
language, one school and one flag."^^

Dr. A.H. Gulledge, national speaker for the Invisible Empire,
advocated "race purity," and said Klansmen would fight in order that
"the State and Church be kept separate in America."

Continuing, he said Protestants intended to see that "they shall not
press down upon the brow of Clncle Sam the thorny triple crown of a
foreign potentate."

If the nation is to survive, he added, "it cannot remain half free
and half parochial schools.

Dr. Culledge prophesied: "Not until the sun shall hide its face or
the moon cease to shine or Cod resigns his throne in the heavens, or
until the white race becomes mongrelized, will the Ku Klux Klan

die. "54

It should be emphasized that these Klansmen and Klanswomen
were not a bunch of stereotype "Southern red-necks." These were
militant anti-Catholic race supremicists from Connecticut, Delaware,
Michigan, New Jersey, New York and Ohio. Others were from
Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas and West
Virginia.

The following day, the leading daily in the nation's capital carried
an editorial titled, "An Impressive Spectacle," which said the
demonstration "may indicate" the Klan was "turning from the un-
American principles of race and religious restriction and opposition
that have been its most striking characteristic," and is now "seeking
to render real and valuable service to the country."

The editorial said the march on Washington provided the Klan an
opportunity "to make itself a force for good without belying the
Americanism of which it bears the symbol. "55

It was evident the Klan was growing more powerful, a point made
by William R. Pattangall, a Protestant, a Mason, former Attorney
General of Maine, and that State's leading Democratic politician, who
also was the Klan's "most distinguished victim. "5®

Pattangall said "Catholics and aliens have borne the brunt" of the
Klan's wrath. The Klan "menace," he said, "embraces the issue of

102

religious freedom, the issue of preserving equal opportunity to all
citizens, the issue of government by, of, and for all, rather than a part,
of the people."

The Klan, he noted, said: "Lincoln was assassinated by order of
the Pope, McKinley [was] killed by a Catholic, and Harding was
poisoned by the K. of C." Further, "They [the Klan] solemnly read
bogus statistics to prove that 90 percent of the deserters in the World
War were Catholics acting under orders of the Church!"^^

The Maine Democrat said further: "The Klan seeks a secret hold
on legislators, judges and other officials, it uses that hold to enforce
its own demands . . .it . . .acts secretly in both parties, it tries
constantly for control--secret control--of elections, legislatures and
governments . .

Replying to Pattangall's article. Imperial Wizard Evans ignored
most of the charges leveled by the former Maine Attorney General.
Rather, Evans ranted against the Catholic Church, which, he said,
"has always opposed the fundamental principle of liberty."

The Church, he declared, "is trying . . .to win control of the
nation," and Catholic politicians attempt to bring the Church into
politics. The Church, he went on, must show "that the need of
intolerance against it has passed."^®

Although The New York Times suggested that the Klan was in
decline in 1926, its own statistics demonstrated that the nationwide
Cathophobe organization was quite robust.

The Times said there were 100,000 Klansmen in New York, who
were "fairly vigorous." Principal strongholds were Suffolk and Nassau
Counties on Long Island, as well as Westchester, Putnam, Dutchess,
Rockland, Sullivan and Cllster Counties. The Klan also had
"considerable influence" in Buffalo, and had influence on elections in
Binghamton and Rochester.®®

A sampling of membership in the Klan in other States indicated
that the organization was rather strong. There were 50,000 in
Connecticut, 150,000 in Kansas, 150,000 in Missouri, 60,000 in New
Jersey, and 250,000 in Ohio.®^

in Indiana, the public was scandalized to learn that D.C.
Stephenson, former Grand Dragon of that State, was convicted of
murdering a young woman and sentenced to life imprisonment.

Commenting on Stephenson, the Times said he "was the boss of
the Republican Party in Indiana, and that through him the Klan was in
control of offices and the process of government."®^

After the Klan extended itself to defeat Catholic Democratic
Presidential candidate Alfred E. Smith it went into decline for two

103

major reasons: first, the CJnited States Supreme Court upheld the
Consitutionality of a New York anti-Klan law which required the Klan
to give publicity to its regulations, oaths and memberships;®^ and
second, the Great Depression, which began in 1929, made keeping or
finding a Job, and feeding the family, far more important than hating
Catholics.

As it turned out, the 1928 general election proved to the
Democratic Party that there was a "Catholic vote." Although Smith
lost by 6.3 million popular votes to the Republican Herbert Hoover,
the Catholic Democrat garnered 6.6 million more votes than did the
1924 Democratic standard bearer, John W. Davis. Smith also
received 5.8 million more votes than did the 1920 Democratic
Presidential candidate, James M. Cox.

Four years later, Franklin D. Roosevelt, with the crucial assistance
of Catholic James E. Farley as Democratic Party Campaign
Chairman, appealed to that Catholic vote and rode the Party to
repeated victories during the next 16 years.

John F. Kennedy also appealed to that same constituency in 1960,
and won a tightly contested election. Some political observers viewed
that election as one of the most religiously intolerant political contests
since the days of the Ku Klux Klan.

It is now time to assess the impact America's long history of anti-
Catholicism has had on freedom of religion in this nation.

104

5/ FOOTSTEPS IN THE SAND

On February 19, 1930, during hearings on the nomination of Hugh
M. Tate to serve as a member of the Interstate Commerce
Commission, Senator Hugo L. Black (D., AL) expressed the view that
the Senate should not consent to the nomination. The Senator
disagreed with Tate's position on business and labor matters, but less
obviously known was the fact that Tate, some years earlier, had tried
to block Black from obtaining a government position in Alabama.

Explaining his opposition to the nominee, the future Supreme
Court Justice said a man's past life had a definite impact on his
beliefs and actions in the future. Senator Black said:

" . . .as a general rule, a man follows in the future the
course that he has followed in the past.

"Show me the kind of steps a man made in the sand five
years ago, and I will show you the kind of steps he is likely to
make in the same sand five years hence.

"Show me the course he was pursuing then, and unless
there has been some great cataclysm which has absolutely
changed his character, I will show you the course he is going
to follow in the future."^

Available evidence confirms that Mr. Black's own footsteps on the
high bench--particularly on the issue of equal religious rights for
Catholics--generally follow "the course he was pursuing" in the past.

Senator Black was a product of an environment redolent with the
odor of anti-Catholic bigotry. Attacks on the Church were a common
occurrence in Birmingham, Alabama, where Black began practicing
law in 1907.

In 1916, the local newspaper reported that membership in the Ku
Klux Klan exceeded the most optimistic expectations, with more than
175 men applying to join the Klan at every meeting.^

In 1920, following discovery of a plot to destroy that city's two
Catholic churches and adjoining schools, federal agents warned the
pastors involved to employ armed guards to protect their property.^

It was a time when the people of Birmingham were led to believe
that Catholics "are plotting control of the city, state and national

105

governments in the name of the Pope, that they seek the destruction
of the public schools, and that they are a menace to the existence of
the home as the basic unit of organized society."^

One of the principal groups promoting that vintage Know-
Nothingism was the "True Americans," or "T.A.s," which had proven
enormously successful in denying employment to Catholics.

"If you didn't belong to the 'T.A.s,'" you were "suspect" in the eyes
of those bigots who were dedicated to the "extermination of
Catholicism."^

A Tombstone Becomes A Stepping Stone

That mind-set precipitated the murder of Father James E. Coyle
in Birmingham on August 11, 1921, and the subsequent acquittal of
his assassin.

The kindly and beloved 48-year-old priest, a native of Athlone,
Ireland, had been pastor of St. Paul's Catholic Church for 17 years
when he died from a gunshot wound, inflicted by an impoverished
Methodist minister-barber, as he sat reading after dinner on the front
porch of his old frame rectory.®

Father Coyle's murderer. Rev. E. R. Stephenson, was assigned to
no regular church, but usually hung around the courthouse looking for
couples to marry. He was referred to as "the marrying parson" by
courthouse habitues.^

A local newspaper said the minister was angry with the priest
because Stephenson's daughter Ruth was considering conversion to
Catholicism, and was planning to marry Pedro Gussman, a Catholic
Puerto Rican who was 12 years older than the young woman.®

Stephenson admitted that he had called the priest "a dirty dog,"
but said Father Coyle "struck me twice on the head and knocked me
to my knees." At that point the parson said the priest "run his hand in
his pocket, and I shot."®

Two hours after the murder, Ruth Stephenson telephoned her
mother to announce her marriage to Gussman.^®

On August 13, the minister was formally charged with murder in
the first degree. On that day and the following day the press
surprisingly reported that the impoverished defendant had conferred
with a number of local attorneys, but had made no announcement
concerning the selection of a specific lawyer.^ ^

It is doubtful that many readers of the local papers at that time

106

would have paid particular attention to a headline in the Birmingham
Age-Herald which appeared immediately under a photograph of
mourners attending Father Coyle's funeral. The headline said:
"Masons To Hold Conference." The brief news item noted that the
Jefferson County Masons would hold their semi-annual meeting
August 16-17.^^

Meanwhile, at the priest's funeral Mass, Bishop Edward P. Allen of
Mobile deplored the dramatic change that had taken place in
Birmingham during the past several years. Twenty-five years earlier,
and up until 1915, he said, non-Catholics had always been cordial,
broadminded, and got along well with their fellow Catholic friends and
neighbors.

However, all that had changed, and he attributed the new attitude
to the work of politicians and secret societies.

The year 1915, of course, marked the resuscitation of the Ku Klux
Klan by Col. William Simmons.

On August 14, Ruth Stephenson Gussman, the new bride, informed
the press that she had been baptized into the Catholic Church at Our
Lady of Sorrows Church by Father Kelly--not Father Coyle.

She also said her father had locked her in her room on the day she
was scheduled to receive her First Communion. Additionally, she told
the press that her parents were trying to force her to marry "a Mason
who was divorced."^''*

On August 16, the new bride's father, who, it was universally
agreed, was of very modest circumstances, announced that he had
selected, not one attorney, but had engaged a battery of four lawyers.
They were: Hugo L. Black, Crampton Harris, John C. Arnold and Fred
Fite.^^

Because of the Klan's proven close ties to Masonry, it may not
have been entirely coincidental that the first day of the semi-annual
meeting of the Jefferson County Freemasons was curiously the very
day the impecunious Rev. Stephenson finally decided to select a
mass of legal talent to defend him from going to prison for the murder
of a Catholic priest.

The preliminary grand jury trial of Stephenson was held on August
23 in the Court of Misdemeanors and Felonies.

Sheriff J. C. Hartsfield testified that there were no bruises noticed
on the defendant, thus implying that the priest never struck his
assassin.^® However, his deputy testified that Stephenson had a lump
on the side of his head.^^

Another witness asserted that the defendant never complained
about a head wound until the day after the murder.^®

107

Testimony also developed that three shots were fired "as fast as
you can pull a trigger." Witness A.L. Easter saw Stephenson fire the
first shot two feet from the porch steps. After the shooting, he said, the
defendant rose from his knees and walked toward the courthouse.^®

It was also disclosed that the man doing the shooting was below
the man being shot. Father Coyle was killed by a bullet that entered
near the left ear and passed out through the back of his head.^®

No one testified that they saw the priest do anything, and no other
weapon was introduced into evidence.

The testimony of the witnesses pointed to premeditated murder of
the priest by Stephenson.

The preacher's daughter, Ruth Stephenson Gussman, testified that
her parents had made "many threats" in her presence about what they
would do to the Catholic Church or to Father Coyle. She said:

"We have had people there at the house--Masons--and
they have all said that they wished the whole Catholic
institution was in hell, if you will excuse me. My mother has
said many a time that she wished she could set a bomb under
the Catholic Cathedral.

"My father asked me one time if 1 wanted to cause the
death of Mr. Bender [a Catholic friend] and Father Coyle, and 1
would if 1 continued going to church.

Following her testimony, Mrs. Gussman said she had received
threats of being kidnapped, and that efforts were being made to send
her to an insane asylum. She filed a petition in circuit court for an
injunction to restrain city, county and State officials from molesting
her in any manner.^^

When the case went to trial before a jury in Criminal Court, a local
journal noted that Stephenson entered the court smiling, "and seemed
little concerned by the trial.

Another reporter observed that one of the witnesses to the
shooting was W.D. Chiles, and that the defendant's attorney. Black,
elicited the fact that Chiles was the brother-in-law of Edwin McGinty, a
Catholic. Also, another witness was probed by Black and found to be
a Catholic.

Black claimed self-defense and insanity for his client. At one point
a witness testified that Rev. Stephenson seemed "nervous" and
"abnormal." The prosecuting attorney interjected to say the word
"abnormal" was vague, and could mean anything.

The presiding judge, William E. Fort, overruled the objection by

108

stating that "abnormal" means "insane." The judge knew that, he said,
because "I looked it up."^^

Black put Ruth Gussman's husband on the stand. The attorney had
the shades on the windows drawn, to emphasize the man's swarthy
complexion, and addressed the Jury: "I want you to look at this man."

Turning to the defendant. Black asked: "Were you aware that
Gussman was a Puerto Rican?"

Stephenson responded: "You can call him a Puerto Rican, but to
me he's a nigger."

Summing up. Black referred to Gussman's Spanish descent and
commented: "He's descended a long way. There are 20 mulattos to
every Negro in Puerto Rico."^®

In his closing argument. Black said:

"Who believes Ruth Stephenson has not been proselyted?

A child of a Methodist does not suddenly depart from her
religion unless someone has planted in her mind the seeds of
influence . . .There is such a thing as imprisonment of the
human will by influence, vice, and persuasion. When you find
a girl who has been reared well persuaded from her parents
by some cause or person, that cause or person is wrong.

"If the eyes of the world are upon the verdict of this Jury, I
would write that verdict in words that cannot be
misunderstood, that the home of the people of Birmingham
cannot be touched. If that brings disgrace, God hasten the
disgrace.

Although Ruth Gussman had testified before the grand Jury that
Masons were strongly opposed to the Catholic Church, and "said that
they wished the whole Catholic institution was in hell," neither the
prosecuting attorney nor Black questioned whether any of the Jurors
or witnesses were Masons.

Four hours after closing argument, the Jury returned a "not guilty"
verdict. Shortly thereafter, each Juror filed past the defendant,
Stephenson, to shake his hand. Judge Fort discharged the Jury with
thanks and said they had rendered an "honest verdict."^®

Commenting on the results of the trial, the leading local
newspaper ran an editorial which said: "Even those in Birmingham
who have taken only such cursory interest in the case as impelled
them to wish the law to take its regular course will find the verdict
hard to understand."^®

Ruth Gussman later wrote a letter to the editor of the same

109

newspaper to protest that she had never been called to testify. She
also repeated the substance of her testimony before the grand jury,
noting particularly her parents' strident anti-Catholicism, and their
desire to destroy the Catholic Church and Father Coyle.

One newsman said his impression was that the prosecuting
attorney and his staff "did not really want to convict Stephenson." The
newsman suspected that the eyewitness had been deliberately held
back until rebuttal, when new testimony would not be admissible.

Virginia Van Der Veer Hamilton has written that the Ku Klux Klan
had done its work well. She said J. Fisher Rothermel, a reporter for
the Birmingham News, recalled that the Klan and similar
organizations had raised a handsome sum to pay legal fees for
Stephenson's defense. The jury foreman was a Klansman, according
to James Esdale, Cyclops of the Robert E. Lee Klavern at the time of
the trial, and Black and his law partner, Crampton Harris, became
members of the Invisible Empire. Harris served as Cyclops of the
Robert E. Lee Klavern.

Mrs. Hamilton also reported that Masons had close ties to the
Klan. She noted that during an initiation ceremony of the Birmingham
Klan in 1924, the speaker estimated that 1,125,000 Masons were Klan
members, because they realized that "the Klan's ideals were identical
with their own."^^

A letter in Justice Black's files shows that William E. Fort, Sr.,
resigned his position as Judge of the Criminal Court (in Birmingham)
to become Black's law partner. Another letter among those records
shows that Judge Fort expressed his appreciation to Black for helping
him obtain the position of Assistant Clnited States Attorney.^"^

The New York Times reported that Fort was a fellow Klansman
with Black.

Pulitzer Prize Journalist Ray Sprigle of the Pittsburgh Post Gazette
said the large granite cross which marks the grave of Father Coyle in
Elmwood Cemetery in Birmingham "is considered the stepping stone
of Hugo L. Black's determined march to the United States Supreme
Court."36

A Klansman Moves To G.S. Senate

Black's defense of Stephenson made him widely known
throughout the State, in a trial that was the most famous in Alabama
history. When the State's CJ.S. Senator, Oscar Underwood, came out
against the Klan in the 1924 national election he was forced to leave

110

public office.

CJnderwood's remarkably courageous position made Black, who
had joined the Klan in 1923,^® a leading contender to replace the
heroic CJnderwood in Washington.

Black had the support of the Alabama Klan, and to hold Klan
support devoted part of his campaign to voicing opposition to
Governor A1 Smith, who was widely known to be a Catholic.®®

Early in 1928, CJ.S. Senate Democrats voted 35 to 1 to support
Senator Joseph T. Robinson's (D., AR) rebuke of his colleague
Senator Tom Heflin (D., AL) for the latter's attack on Governor Smith.
Senator Black, though present, was excused by the Democratic
Caucus from voting.'^®

Black was under considerable pressure to voice his support for
Smith after the New York Governor had been selected as the
Democrats' nominee for President of the United States.The
Senator's files contain numerous letters urging him to speak out for
the Democratic nominee, but Black invariably replied that he felt his
best course of action was to say nothing, although he insisted he was
supporting the Party, and Smith.''^^

One letter, marked "Personal and Confidential," was from Senator
Claude A. Swanson (D., VA), who urged Black "to take the leadership
in Alabama for the Smith ticket regardless of consequences."

Black replied: "1 must admit that Governor Smith's statement on
the prohibition [of liquor] question, which 1 considered to be wholly
unnecessary, and his appointment of Mr. [John J.j Raskob, which 1
considered to be a supreme political blunder so far as the South is
concerned, has made it difficult for us. His personal views on
immigration have given aid and comfort to our ancient enemy [the
Catholic Church?], and estranged many of our friends."

Continuing, Black said: "1 am supporting the ticket. 1 must render
that support by the following the course which seems most effective
for the interests of the party . . .

Shortly before the 1928 general election. The New York Times ran
an article on the Ku Klux Klan and anti-Catholic propaganda. The
article mentioned various defenders of A1 Smith in Alabama, but
Senator Black's name was not listed among those defenders.

Following Smith's defeat by Herbert Hoover, the Montgomery
Advertiser scolded Black for his "total indifference and neglect" of a
party which had supported him in 1926. Black was faulted for
adamantly refusing to make a statement urging support for the
Democratic Party Presidential ticket.^®

Ill

Dr. A. L. Stabler, Grand Knight of the Knights of Columbus in
Alabama, said he didn't believe Black's support for Smith was very
strong. The Grand Knight noted that he had been requested by Black
to submit lists of names of Catholics to be considered for
appointments in the Post Office Department, but he stopped sending
the Senator such lists when he found none of his recommendations
were acted upon.'^®

Further evidence of Black's strong opposition to the Catholic
Church was provided in February, 1929, when the Senate considered
a bill for the construction of naval vessels, and the matter became
bogged down in the "Catholic Flag" argument.

Black's Senatorial colleague from Alabama, and a widely
recognized anti-Catholic bigot, proposed an amendment to the
legislation which said, "it shall be unlawful to fly any flag or pennant
on the same staff or hoist it above the flag of the CJnited States."

The reference obviously was to the chaplain's flag, emblazoned
with the Cross of St. Andrew, which flies over the Stars and Stripes
when chapel services are in progress aboard ships.

Senator William Bruce (D., MD)--who noted that he had been
defeated by the Klan the preceding November--asked whether any
church flags "except the Catholic flag" are ever flown above our
national flag on our ships. Heflin said he knew of none.

Another Senator observed that "the church flag" is flown on naval
vessels when church services are in progress to indicate "that God is
over the Nation and over the Navy."

Heflin rejoined that he saw no necessity "for pulling the Stars and
Stripes down to make room for anybody's flag above it. 1 want it to be
first," he said.

Senator Bruce commented that Heflin called the chaplain's flag a
"Catholic flag," and remarked that Heflin's amendment had its origin
with the Ku Klux Klan.

The amendment was defeated by a vote of 10 to 68. Senator Black
voted with nine other colleagues in support of Heflin's proposal.

On December 27, 1929, Alabama Klan Grand Dragon James
Esdale attacked the State Democratic Committee, which barred
candidates for office who had failed to support the Democratic
nominee in the last general election. Esdale said the Committee's
action was so "unfair . . .so intolerant. . .so obedient to the Roman
Catholic Church that it is being hotly contested by every Democratic
Senator and Representative in Washington." Presumably Senator
Black was among that group.^®

in 1936, Senator Black left a footprint in the sand which showed a

112

frightening proclivity to trample civil rights of the public at large, even
by "subterfuge," if necessary, to impose his will. This was evident
when, as chairman of the Senate Lobby Investigating Committee,
agents of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC),
accompanied by the Black Committee, used a subpoena to obtain
files of Western Onion, Postal Telegraph, and other communications
companies.^®

The subpoena was considered "vague," and effectively "a
dragnet" which infringed on the constitutional rights of many private
citizens who were in no way associated with the committee's

50

inquiry.“^^

The issue went to the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia,
where Crampton Harris, Black's former law partner and Cyclops of
the Klan's Robert E. Lee Klavern, spoke on behalf of Black's
committee as a friend of the court. Harris argued for an hour "the right
of the committee to subpoena evidence without interference by the
courts." The subpoena itself reportedly demanded the production of
all telegrams addressed to anybody in the world, according to The
New York Times.

The Court's Chief Justice, Alfred A. Wheat, rebuked the action by
Black's committee, enjoined the seizure of telegraphic
correspondence, and restrained Western Onion from delivering the
files to the committee.

The Court said the "subpoena goes way beyond any legitimate
exercise of the right of the subpoena duces tecus."^^

The Times noted that the FCC had ruled, on April 15, 1935, that
private telegrams and telephone records were inviolable.®^

On April 6, 1936, the United States Supreme Court (Jones v.
Securities Exchange Commission) rebuked Black's committee for
conducting a fishing expedition, and characterized the committee's
action to seize the telegrams and other communications as odious.®'^
Obviously, the gentleman from Alabama vigorously disagreed with
the Supreme Court's view, and subsequently delivered a radio
address in which he supported President Franklin D. Roosevelt's
"court-packing" proposal. The Alabama Senator said:

"1 naturally believe it is time to stop these judicial
usurpations brought about . . .by the economic fallacies of a
majority of the Supreme Court.

"A majority of our judges should not amend our
Constitution according to their economic predilections every
time they decide a case."®®

113

The Court's Ku Kluxer

Clearly, Senator Black was a highly controversial figure, and his
record in favor of trampling the civil rights of certain people made
him a pariah in many civilized circles. Indeed, on the very day
President Franklin Roosevelt sent the Alabama Senator's name "amid
unusual secrecy" to the Senate as his nominee to replace Justice
Willis Van de Vanter on the Supreme Court, Black had prepared a
speech against an anti-lynching bill. The speech was not delivered
because of his nomination, according to Representative Samuel D.
McReynolds (D., TN).^^

The President's selection of Black, and the high-handed way he
used the powerful machinery of the ruling Democratic Party to
railroad the nomination through Congress, gave clear evidence that
Mr. Roosevelt would pack the court with men of his philosophic
persuasion on liberal social issues.

As soon as the nomination reached the Senate, Senator Henry
Ashurst (D., AZ), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee,
requested unanimous consent to have Black approved immediately
by the Senate without normal referral to committee.

Although that move was objected to by Senators Edward Burke
(D., NE) and Hiram Johnson (R., CA), the nomination was referred to
the Judiciary Subcommittee and approved 5 to 1 on the same day it
was received by the Senate.

Of eight newspapers which commented editorially on the
nomination, only two approved Black's selection.^®

Curiously, legal scholars have given scant attention to a highly
important fact about Black's position on the high bench, which was
raised by Senators William Borah (R., ID) and Warren Austin (R., NH).
Senator Black was constitutionally incapable of being appointed to
the Court. He had been a member of Congress when that body
enacted legislation increasing the compensation of Supreme Court
Justices, and therefore could not be promoted to a position which paid
more money than his position as a Member of Congress.

The Constitution (Article 1, Sec. 6) states:

"No Senator or Representative shall, during the time for
which he was elected, be appointed to any civil office under
the authority of the CJnited States . . .the emoluments whereof
shall have been increased during such time ..."

The salary of Justices at that time had recently been increased by

114

Congress to $20,000 per year, making it exactiy doubie the saiary of
Members of Congress, who earned $10,000.^®

Homer Cummings, Attorney Generai of the CJnited States, and with
Rooseveit and Biack a feiiow Mason, said the appointment was
perfectiy iegai. Cummings, aithough responsibie for checking the
nominee's background before sending his name to the Senate, never
bothered to do so.®®

Senator Royai S. Copeiand (D., NY) caiied Biack's nomination
"an insuit to the American peopie."

He added: "No man who was directiy or indirectiy connected with
the Ku Kiux Kian, or was the beneficiary of its sympathy or support is
fit for a piace on any impartiai tribunai, and certainiy not for a piace
on the Supreme Court bench."

The New York Senator said the nominee did not possess an
"impartiai mind," and questioned whether he was "abie to administer
evenhanded justice to aii who come before him regardiess of reiigion
or race."®^

Nevertheiess, Biack had friends in high piaces. His nomination
was consented to by the Senate with a vote of 63 to 16, on August 17,
1937.®2

The foiiowing day, Biack iunched with the President. As he ieft the
White House, he assured newsmen he did not know when or where he
wouid take the oath of office. However, about six hours iater, the oath
as a Justice of the Clnited States Supreme Court was administered in
virtuaiiy a secret ceremony by Charies F. Pace, financiai cierk of the
Senate.®^

Normaiiy, the oath is administered by the Chief Justice in the
robing room on the day the new member first appears with the other
Justices, it seemed as though Mr. Rooseveit, and those who wanted a
dramatic shift in the Supreme Court, knew they were on shaky ground
with Biack. Apparently, they wanted him locked into his position
before the nomination could possibly be blocked.

But then, suddenly, the enormity of Black's bigotry was exposed in
all its sordid deviousness by the Pittsburgh Post Gazette.

Black had ostensibly resigned from the Klan in 1925 by means of
a note written on stationery bearing the letterhead of the Klan's Office
of the Grand Realm of Alabama. The note, addressed to J.W.
Hamilton, Kligrapp (Secretary), dated July 9, 1925, said:

Dear Sir and Klansman:

Beg to tender you herewith my resignation as a member

115

of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, effective from this date on.

Yours I.T.S.CJ.B. [In the Sacred CJnbreakable Bond],

Hugo L. Black®"^

Black resigned, according to The New York Times, "so that he
would be able to disclaim membership in the Klan if challenged on
that score during the 1926 primaries."

The same Times article said he had decided to resign following a
conference with Klan officials after receiving a pledge of their support
in the primaries. However, "the resignation was kept in the Klan
archives and was never presented to J.W. Hamilton, Kligrapp of the
Robert E. Lee Klan No. 1, to whom it was addressed, or made known
to the Klan rank and file."®^

Reporter Ray Sprigle said Black was welcomed back into the Klan
at a great State meeting in Birmingham on September 2, 1926.

"I realize," Black had told the assembled Klansmen, including
representatives from other States, "that I was elected by men who
believe in the principles that I have sought to advocate and which are
the principles of this organization."

Black swore never to divulge, even under threat of death, the
secrets of the Invisible Empire. And, he said,

"I swear that I will most zealously and valiantly shield and
preserve by any and all justifiable means and methods . .
.white supremacy . . .

"All to which I have sworn to by this oath, 1 will seal with
my blood, be Thou my witness. Almighty God. Amen."®®

Accepting the Klan's gold card, or "grand passport" of life
membership. Black said:

"This passport which you have given me is a symbol to
me of the passport which you have given me before. 1 do not
feel that it would be out of place to state to you here on this
occasion that I know that without the support of the members
of this organization, 1 would not have been called, even by my
enemies, the 'Junior Senator from Alabama.' 1 realize that I
was elected by men who believe in the principles that I have
sought to advocate and which are the principles of this
organization."®^

Reporter Sprigle reported, on the basis of official files of the

116

Alabama Klan, that Black preached alone, hailing the manifest
destiny of the Invisible Empire as it moved irresistibly toward its goal
of a white Protestant state, Southland and the Nation.®®

The principles which Black "sought to advocate" were reflected in
a speech by the Imperial Wizard:

"The Klan is scattered over the nation. The Catholic
sentiment is hot in the big centers of the nation. And thus we
are going to see whether the progress through the succeeding
years of this century will be a progress through centralized
hierarchical control of government and religions [note the
plural], or whether we will have the great open spaces
continue to provide the thought and the direction for this great
free nation.

"That is the Klan program. We are here to preserve
America and to do it as a genuine fight, and 1 don't mean
maybe . . .

"No, the Catholic hasn't any chance to control Alabama.

And the Negro hasn't any chance to control Alabama . . . ."

After the Wizard spoke, the Imperial Legal Adviser, William E.
Zumbrunn, addressed the group. He said, in part:

" . . .the man known as Al Smith, who seeks the
Presidency of the CJnited States, lowered the dignity of that
high office by bowing the knee to a foreign potentate and
kissing the ring upon his finger. Men, it is those conditions
which the Klan is called upon to correct. . .

" . . .America, the home of the free and the brave has
been invaded by large hordes of foreigners that have neither
the inclination nor the training to love our institutions and our
flag, and that power and that wave represented in the kultur of
Catholicism across the water brings to America's shores the
message of a Pope.

"The Catholic Hierarchy has been driven from every
country on the face of the earth, save Mexico and America as
a political machine."

Zumbrunn went on to deplore holding a Eucharistic Congress in
the United States, an event which he said was a plan to make
America the home of the Catholic Church and to challenge the
supremacy of the Klan.

Calling out to the throng, he asked if they were going to permit

117

such an event to transpire, and the mob shouted back: "No! No!"

"Well," the Legal Adviser replied, "If you are not going to permit it.
. .send back to the confines of Hades any man that lowers the dignity
of the CJnited States to kiss the ring of any foreigner."®^

New York Times reporter Russell B. Porter showed Winston
Williams of 7321 Third Avenue, South, in Birmingham, an affidavit
which he had signed during preparation of the articles written for the
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, and asked the Alabaman whether the affidavit
was correct. Williams agreed that it was.

He stated in the affidavit that he had been a member of the Klan in
Birmingham in 1926, that he had attended the meeting at which Black
is said to have received his life membership card, and that he had
heard Mr. Black accept the card in a speech in which he thanked
Grand Dragon Esdale and the Klan for the honor of life membership
and their support of his candidacy in the primary.^®

With few exceptions, the revelations triggered by Sprigle's
articles, which were picked up by the Times and other major dailies,
caused a national uproar.

The Nation magazine, well known for its liberalism, supported
Black vigorously, a position totally contrary to its articles some years
earlier which had deplored the pervasive bigotry in Alabama. One
editorial in that publication said: "If we thought Justice Black were
now a Klansman, in fact, spirit, deed, or idea, we should oppose him
bitterly and without compromise."

But, the editorial continued, it saw nothing in his record that
carried "even a whiff of the Klan smell." Rather, the magazine saw "a
brilliant, militant, uncompromising liberal.

The New York Times could not understand that viewpoint as set
forth in The Nation, The New Republic, and other liberal journals. One
editorial of the Times said:

"Of what importance are old records of bigotry and
religious persecution, compared with a Senator's vote on
some new bill to curb industry or tax the rich? The New
Liberalism, intent on economic issues, finds it easy to forgive
some negligence in the matter of civil liberties..

A week later, the Times again editorialized on the liberals'
exculpation of Black with the following words:

"The so-called 'liberals' ignore the fact of Black's
membership in the Klan and his fitness to serve. They revert

118

to argumentum ad hominem, to wit: 'Who exposed Black?'
What [were] the political opinions of the persons who dug up
the evidence against him? What were their motives?"

"The editors of the liberal weeklies, and others making
increasing use of the ad hominem argument, must be too
intelligent to know they are not resorting to demagogy of a
cheap and shameless sort. It is on all fours with Hitler's
argument that a scientific discovery is worthless if it is made

by a Jew. "^3

Black Evades The Issue

After his lifetime membership in the Klan was exposed. Black and
his wife sailed to Europe. The furor in the press, however, would not
die down. The continuing outrage of the American people, as
expressed in the media, forced the new Justice, upon his return to
America several weeks later, to deliver a nationwide radio address,
ostensibly to explain his membership in the Klan.

However, the address was vintage Black. He never expressly
repudiated the Klan, nor denied the accuracy of press reports
concerning his Klan activity and the statements attributed to him. He
never said he was sorry; never apologized. Rather, he attacked his
opponents, and by innuendo, the Catholic Church, and any other
religious people who project "religious beliefs into a position of prime
importance" in public life.

To those who were aware of Black's attitude toward the Church,
and to organized religion generally, it was striking to note his
argument focused, not on the odious activities of the Klan, but rather
on dangers inherent in diverse religious beliefs.

That fear of what sincere religious people can do in society later
became a major concern of the Court upon which Black sat,
beginning with the Everson decision in 1947, regarding freedom of
religion in education, and progressing to the Roe v. Wade case of
1973, involving the sanctity of human life from the moment of
conception.

In his radio address. Black said, in part:

"The Constitutional safeguard to complete liberty of
religious belief is a declaration of the greatest importance to
the future of America as a nation of free people. Any

119

movement, or action by any group that threatens to bring
about a result inconsistent with this unrestricted individual
right, is a menace to freedom.

"Let me repeat: any program, even if directed by good
intentions, which tends to breed or revive religious discord or
antagonism can and may spread with such rapidity as to
imperil this vital Constitutional protection of one of the most
sacred human rights.

"I believe no ordinary manoeuvre executed for political
advantage would justify a member of the Supreme Court in
publicly discussing it. If however, the manoeuvre threatens
the existing peace and harmony between religious or racial
groups in our country the occasion is not an ordinary one. It is
extraordinary."^^

Black went on to say that while he was in Europe, "a planned and
concerted campaign" to fan the flames of prejudice and calculated to
create racial and religious hatred had taken place.

If such a campaign continued, he said, it will project "religious
beliefs into a position of prime importance in political campaigns and
. . . reinject our social and business life with the passion of religious
bigotry."

Continuing, he declared:

"It will bring the political religionist back into undeserved
and perilous influence in affairs of government. . .

"I believe my record as a Senator refutes every
implication of racial or religious intolerance . . .

"I did Join the Klan. I later resigned. 1 never rejoined . . .1
do not now consider the unsolicited card given me shortly
after my nomination to the Senate as a membership of any
kind in the Ku Klux Klan. I never used it. I did not even keep
it."

Black said he had no sympathy "with any organization or group
which anywhere or at any time arrogates to itself the un-American
power to interfere in the slightest degree with complete religious
freedom."

Concluding, he spoke a line that has become a classic statement
identified with the prejudiced: "Some of my best and most intimate
friends are Catholics and Jews."^^

He never explained who had mounted an alleged campaign
attempting to "fan the flames of prejudice calculated to create racial

120

and religious hatred" during the brief period of his vacation in Europe.

He failed to indicate how such a purported effort differed in scope
and intensity from the Klan's venomous program of religious and
racial hatred which convulsed the nation for 22 years, and in which,
the record shows. Black actively participated.

The new CJ.S. Supreme Court Justice did not define what he meant
by "political religionist," nor did he explain how such a person or
persons had acted adversely to the common good in the past. Neither
did he tell why such individual(s) supposedly hold "undeserved and
perilous influence in affairs of government."

Notably, he never categorically condemned the Klan nor its
beliefs and practices.

Moreover, Black never explained the reason for taking his
Supreme Court oath in secret, nor did he choose to reveal the content
of that particular oath. Was it similar to the oaths he took as a Mason?
Was it the oath of a Klansman?

in his nationwide radio address, he certainly made no solemn
declaration or promise to renounce and vigorously oppose any Klan
or Masonic bias against the Catholic religion which might be found on
the bench or elsewhere; nor did he express an intention never to sit in
judgment in cases in which his bias against the Catholic Church
might be suspected.

in fact, the total impact of his broadcast was overwhelmingly
negative, as evidenced by press reaction the following day.

The New York Herald Tribune editorialized that the Justice's
conduct was "that of a coward," and added:

"The effort of Senator Black to suggest that he is the real
protagonist of tolerance and that his enemies are intolerant is
perhaps the greatest item of effrontery in a uniquely brazen
utterance. Only a man heedless of the truth and a man afraid
of his official skin could fall so low."^®

The Newark Ledger said: "As he resigned from the Klan, he
should resign from the Court."^^

Negative editorials appeared also in The Boston Herald, Boston
Post, Hartford Courant, Worcester Telegram, Cleveland Plain Dealer,
and Buffalo Courier.^®

The Buffalo Evening News said that if Black continued on the
bench, "every attorney representing a member of a group which the
Ku Klux Klan terrorized can protest his sitting in judgment.

The Chatanooga Times editorialized:

121

"One wanted so desperately to believe that Mr. Black
would add: '1 have this day forwarded my resignation as an
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the CJnited States.'
if that had been Mr. Black's contribution to the spirit of
tolerance and of freedom, it would have made his speech an
epochal event. Instead there followed the type of statement to
be expected from a police court lawyer trying to obtain the
dismissal of charges against a housebreaker by pleading that
the defendant has always been kind to his family."®®

And The New York Times commented:

"Moral sense finds it increasingly hard to speak out in a
world educated to the notion of a class morality and party
morality, it is the ideologies against the humanities, it is the
new morality by which Liberals may defend a Klansman on
the Supreme Court because he is sound on the
Administration's economic program . . .

"The new flexible moral code may even permit a good
Liberal to look across the Atlantic and condone in one type of
despotism the physical and spiritual brutalities which he
condemns in another.

"The Liberal with a capital 'L' has pushed into the
background the fine old word liberal with a small '!'. The
liberal mind was the open mind, and the liberal temper was
the middle-of-the-road temper. The New Liberalism now
covers men from the radical camps and the revolutionary
camps, and they have brought with them their doctrinaire
rigidities and their hard-boiled tactics.

"The former liberal approach to social problems was the
moderate, gradualist approach . . .The new Liberalism
hankers for the moral and technical shortcuts which the
dictators employ as a matter of course."®^

Despite the Constitutional prohibition on Senator Black's eligibility
to serve on the Supreme Court (Article 1, Sec. 6), and the
overwhelming public opposition to his Klan background, the
gentleman from Alabama was to serve on the high bench for 34
years.

Had he changed his attitude toward the Church, so that there
should be no suspicion that his opinions were tainted with prejudice in
cases involving the religion clause? By no means.

With regard to the Christian Church generally, the Justice's own

122

son, Hugo Black, Jr., wrote that his father--

" . . .would make fun of the church . . .by hilarious
imitation, singing through his nose songs like 'How tedious
and tasteless the hours when Jesus came into my life. .

But the Roman Catholic Church, as in Black's Klan days, seemed
to ignite in the Justice a particular animosity, according to his son,
who wrote:

"The Ku Klux Klan and Daddy, so far as 1 could tell, only
had one thing in common. He suspected the Catholic Church.

He used to read all of Paul Blanshard's books exposing power
abuse in the Catholic Church. He thought the popes and
bishops had too much power and property. He resented the
fact that rental property owned by the Church was not taxed;
he felt they got most of their revenue from the poor and they
did not return enough of it. But even then his favorite district
judge was a man who had been a bishop's lawyer. .

Hugo, Jr. also reported that his father suspected the Catholic
Church was aspiring to be the State Church in the CJnited States, and
the Justice "could not tolerate any sign of encouraging religious faith
by state aid." (Emphasis added).

On the other hand, as so many of Justice Black's opinions
evidence, he was determined to make the Supreme Court a haven for
"the nonconforming victims of prejudice"®^, a facile phrase used by
Hugo, Jr. to characterize his father's sympathy for non-believers in
Judeo-Christian truths.

Indeed, the Justice "could not whip himself up to a belief in God or
the divinity of Christ, life after death, or Heaven or Hell . .

CJnquestionably, Justice Hugo Lafayette Black spoke from
experience when, in 1930, he said "a man follows in the future the
course that he has followed in the past," and "the kind of steps a man
made in the sand five years ago" show "the kind of steps he is likely
to make in the same sand five years hence."

Perhaps the record of his activities would be even more dismal if
he had not deliberately burned 600 volumes of his notes and
papers.®^

The Justice's son said that fifteen years prior to his death, his
father "had made it clear to me exactly what papers he wanted
destroyed." Moreover, that profound concern by the Justice to

123

eliminate perhaps impolitic or other damning documents never left
his mind. Hugo, Jr. wrote:

"Practically the first thing Daddy wanted me to do once he
was installed in the hospital was to go out and burn certain
papers of his."®®

in the Justice's Papers is a memorandum to his secretary
(Frances Lamb), signed by Black, which says in part:

"Hugo, Jr. will tell you what to do, that is to destroy them
all. Hugo L. Black."®®

in view of Justice Black's long history of prejudice against the
Catholic Church, and Christianity generally, his majority opinion in a
precedent Court decision on the issue of judicial bias appears to be
the ultimate in contemptuous irony. He wrote:

"A fair trial in a fair tribunal is a basic requirement of due
process. Fairness of course requires an absence of actual
bias in the trial of cases. But our system of law has always
endeavored to prevent even the probability of unfairness . .

.no man is permitted to try cases where he has an interest in
the outcome . . .But to perform its high function in the best
way 'justice must satisfy the appearance of justice.'

124

6/ THE CRAFT FIGHTS
RELIGION-CLAUSE HISTORY

Justice Hugo Lafayette Black arrived on the Court about the time
Congress began considering major appropriations for education,
including funds to assist students in Catholic and other religiously
affiliated institutions. It was a period when the Craft desperately
needed a member of the Fraternity on the high bench, such as Justice
Black, who "could not tolerate any sign of encouraging religious faith
by state aid."^

As will be demonstrated below. Brother Black did not let the
Fraternity down. But his work was cut out for him.

For many years prior to the Alabama Senator's ascendancy to the
high bench. Supreme Court decisions regarding religious freedom
had been moving inexorably against the Craft's little-known 1920
Colorado Springs plan to cast the minds of America's school children
in a Masonic mold.

In 1899, for example, the Court held that there is no Constitutional
bar against the government contracting with corporations affiliated
with the Catholic Church which perform public welfare services, "as
long as the corporation is managed according to the law under which
it exists."

Further, said the Court, contracts with such corporations cannot be
voided simply because their officers happen to adhere to "the
doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church," or because the
corporation's officials happen to wear distinctive religious garb.^

Again, in 1923, the Court ruled that the legislature of a State may
not "interfere with . . .the power of the parents to control the education
of their young.

Just two years later, the same tribunal, in the Pierce case, struck
down as unconstitutional the Masonically crafted 1922 Oregon law
which required every child in that State to attend public school.'^

And in 1930, the Court held that children in nonpublic schools
may be provided secular textbooks at government expense.^

Beyond those rulings by the nation's highest tribunal, the Masonic
Fraternity was confronted with a number of state and federal historical

125

precedents which evidenced a public will to protect and advance the
religious values inherent in Christianity.

The Historic Record Of Religion In American

Life

The national record in support of religion generally, and of
Christianity in particular, was manifested--prior to the 1940s--in
numerous official public acts. That reality was perhaps expressed
best in 1892 by Mr. Justice David Brewer in his majority opinion in
Church of the Holy Trinity v. CJ.S. He said:

"... no purpose of action against religion can be imputed
to any legislation, state or national, because this is a religious
people. This is historically true. From the discovery of this
continent to the present hour, there is a single voice making
this affirmation. The commission of Christopher Columbus,
prior to his sail westward, is from 'Ferdinand and Isabella, by
the grace of God, King and Queen of Castile,' etc . . . .The first
Colonial grant to Sir Walter Raleigh was from Elizabeth, by
grace of God . . . queen, defender of the Faith, etc . . . ."®

The Court went on to cite favorably a Judicial decision in
Pennsylvania which held that "general Christianity is and always has
been a part of the common law of Pennsylvania."

Continuing, Justice Brewer, speaking for the Court, also favorably
cited an opinion by Chancellor Kent, Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court of New York, who said (in People v. Ruggles):

"The people of this State, in common with the people of
this country, profess the general doctrines of Christianity, as
the rule of their faith and practice; and to scandalize the
author of these doctrines is not only, in a religious point of
view, extremely impious, but, even in respect to the
obligations due to society, is a gross violation of decency and
good order...

"The free, equal and undisturbed enjoyment of religious
opinion, whatever it may be, and free and decent discussions
on any religious subject, is granted and secured; but to revile,
with malicious and blasphemous contempt, the religion
professed by almost the whole community, is an abuse of that

126

right. Nor are we bound, by any expressions in the
Constitution, as some have strangely supposed, either not to
punish at all, or to punish indiscriminately, the like attacks
upon the religion of Mahomet or the Grand Lama; and for this
plain reason, that the case assumes that we are a Christian
people, and the morality of the country is deeply ingrafted
upon Christianity, and not upon the doctrines or worship of
those imposters."^

State Constitutions

Justice Brewer was entirely accurate. State Constitutions extant at
the time the religion clause was ratified, and for many years after,
evidenced that the Christian religion, particularly Protestant
Christianity, merited protection and encouragement by the State.

For example, the Constitution of New Hampshire, enacted the
year after the religion clause of the First Amendment became
effective, stipulated in Article VI:

"As morality and piety, rightly grounded on evangelical
principles, will give the best and greatest security to
Government, and will lay in the hearts of men the strongest
obligations to due subjection; and as the knowledge of these
is most likely to be propagated through a society by the
institution of the public worship of the Deity, and of public
instruction in morality and religion; therefore, to promote
these important purposes, the people of this State have a right
to empower the Legislature to authorize from time to time, the
several towns, parishes, bodies corporate, or religious
societies, within this State, to make adequate provision, at
their own expense, for the support and maintenance of public
Protestant teachers of piety, religion and morality ....

"And every denomination of Christian, demeaning
themselves quietly and as good subjects of the State, shall be
equally under the protection of the law; and no subordination
of any one sect or denomination to another shall ever be
established by law."®

The Constitution of Massachusetts (adopted in 1780) contained
the same provision as did the New Hampshire Constitution for "public
Protestant teachers of piety, religion and morality." Section VI of the
Massachusetts Constitution required public office holders to declare a
belief in "the Christian religion," and to have a firm persuasion of its
truth.

127

Also, the Constitutions of New Jersey (adopted in 1776), Delaware
(adopted in 1792), Maryland (adopted in 1776), North Carolina
(adopted in 1776), and Vermont (adopted in 1786) provided for
equality among Protestants or Christians.^®

Pennsylvania's Constitution (adopted in 1790, and re-adopted in
1838) stipulated in Article 4: "No person, who acknowledges the
being of a God, and a future state of rewards and punishments shall,
on account of his religious sentiments, be disqualified to hold any
office under this Commonwealth."^^

Constitutional Conventions

Of the Thirteen Original States existing when the Constitution and
its first Ten Amendments were adopted, only three proposed an
amendment concerning religion. Those States were: Virginia, New
York and New Hampshire.

Virginia's convention proposed: "That religion, or the duty which
we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be
directed only by reason and conviction, and not by force and
violence; and therefore all men have a natural, equal, and
unalienable right to the exercise of religion according to the dictates
of conscience; and that no particular religious sect or society ought to
be favored or established by law, in preference to others."

New York proposed an amendment very similar to Virginia's,
except it did not define religion. The New York amendment read:

"That the people have an equal, natural, and unalienable
right freely and peaceably to exercise their religion according
to the dictates of conscience; and that no religious sect or
society ought to be favored or established by law in
preference to others."

New Hampshire proposed: "Congress shall make no laws touching
religion, or to infringe the rights of conscience."

Although North Carolina and Rhode Island did not recommend an
amendment regarding religion, the Conventions in those States
adopted declarations of principles which were identical to the
amendment on religion submitted by Virginia.

Maryland also did not propose an amendment, but a minority of
the delegates urged the following language be added to the new G.S.
Constitution: "That there be no national religion established by law;
but that all persons be equally entitled to protection of their religious
liberty."!®

128

Debates In The First Congress

On June 8, 1789, Representative James Madison of Virginia rose
in the House chamber to offer amendments to the Constitution. He
said:

" . . .in article 1st, section 9, between clauses 3 and 4, be
inserted these clauses, to wit: The civil rights of none shall be
abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall
any national religion be established, nor shall the full and
equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any
pretext infringed . .

Note that Madison recommended the amendment be inserted in
the Constitution between prohibitions on bills of attainder, ex post
facto laws, and suspension of habeas corpus. He did not propose that
it be placed in Article 1st, section 9, before or after clause 7, which
limits withdrawal of funds from the Cl.S. Treasury. Neither did he place
it in Article I, section 10, which concerns acts prohibited by the
States.

Note also that Madison explicitly said he did not want "any
national religion [to] be established." The amendment reflected the
sentiments of his colleagues in the Virginia Constitutional Convention
(reported above) who urged that "no particular religious sect or
society ought to be favored or established by law in preference to
others."

On July 21, 1789, the proposal was referred to a select committee.
On August 15, 1789, the full House again considered the issue, at
which time Madison proposed: "No religion shall be established by
law, nor shall the equal rights of conscience be infringed."^®

Rep. Peter Silvester, of New York, objected to the wording, saying
he perceived the amendment to have a different construction than
had been made in the committee. As worded by Madison, he thought
the amendment might be construed to abolish religion altogether.

Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts said the amendment would
read better if it were changed to say: "No religious doctrine shall be
established by law."

Rep. Roger Sherman of Connecticut thought the amendment was
altogether unnecessary. Congress, he said, had no authority whatever
delegated to it to make religious establishments.^^

Madison said his proposal prohibited Congress from establishing a
religion, and enforcing the legal observation of it by law. Some State
Conventions, he observed, feared the power given by the Constitution

129

to Congress "to make all laws necessary and proper to carry into
execution the Constitution, and the laws made under it, enabled them
to make such laws . . .as might infringe the rights of conscience, and
establish a national religion . .

Benjamin Huntington of Connecticut said he shared the views of
Rep. Silvester that Madison's wording "might be extremely hurtful to
religion." He hoped the amendment could be written in such a way as
to secure the rights of conscience, and a free exercise of the rights of
religion, but "that it not patronize those who professed no religion at
all."

Subsequently, Madison withdrew his amendment.^ ^

On August 17, 1789, Rep. Samuel Livermore of New Hampshire
proposed that the amendment be changed to read: "the equal rights of
conscience, the freedom of speech or of the press, and the right of
trial by jury in criminal cases, shall not be infringed by any State."
The amendment was adopted.

On August 20, the House reconsidered the amendment and
approved the following language proposed by Rep. Fisher Ames of
Massachusetts: "Congress shall make no law establishing religion, or
to prevent the free exercise thereof, or to infringe the rights of
conscience.

The Senate, on September 9, 1789, approved the following
language proposed by Senator Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut (who
subsequently served as Chief Justice of the Cl.S. Supreme Court from
1796 to 1800): "Congress shall make no law establishing articles of
faith or a mode of worship, or prohibiting the free exercise of religion;
or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.

Finally, on September 24, 1789, conferees of the House and
Senate agreed on the clause as it reads today: "Congress shall make
no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof. .

From the comments made in debate it is apparent that the religion
clause was intended to prohibit the National Government from
establishing a single religion and enforcing the observation of it, or its
tenets, by law. At the same time, the Founding Fathers agreed that
religion is very important to the American people and the
Government should protect their right to practice their own religions
freely.

But of equal importance during House debate was the exposition
of another critical facet of the religion clause: that was the view of the
Founding Fathers toward those who practiced no religion at all.

When Benjamin Huntington asserted that the Government should

130

"not patronize those who professed no religion at all," there is no
record that his point was disputed. Indeed, the general thrust of those
reacting to his statement was in the affirmative.

The concern of Huntington and his colleagues, Peter Silvester and
Elbridge Gerry, was prompted by Madison's proposal that "no religion
shall be established by law . . ."

Because of the substantial opposition to his proposal, Madison
withdrew it.

Worth noting, too, is the fact that the Constitution itself concludes
with: "Done in Convention . . .the seventeenth day of September, in
the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven..
." (Emphasis added).

Federal Legislation

Article III of the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 (passed by the
Continental Congress) ordained: "Religion, morality and knowledge
being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind,
schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.

The present Federal Government, formed under the Constitution of
1787, continued the same policies. Territorial land sold by the Federal
Government stipulated that sections were to be reserved for schools
and religious purposes.^®

The Act of June 1, 1796 regulated grants of land appropriated for
the military services and for the Society of the Clnited Brethren for
Propagating the Gospel Among the Heathens. That Act required the
Surveyor General to survey several tracts of land "formerly set apart
by an ordinance of Congress of the 3d September, 1788, for the
Society of the Clnited Brethren for propagating the Gospel among the
heathen; and to issue a patent or patents for the said three tracts to the
said society for the uses and purposes in the said ordinance set
forth.

The record shows there was no objection by any member of
Congress, including James Madison, who helped to shape the religion
clause of the First Amendment. Although the Act of 1796 was
approved by voice vote, Madison was recorded as present for a
quorum call in the House that day, and presumably was available to
object to the measure.®®

In 1798, an Act establishing the government of the Mississippi
Territory contained the same provisions as the Northwest Ordinance
of 1787.31

In 1803, the territorial government of Ohio was authorized by
Congress to sell all or part of the lands appropriated by Congress "for

131

the support of religion within the Ohio company's and John Cleeves
Symmes' purchases . .

That federal legislation was re-enacted in 1826 and 1833. it was
not rescinded until 1968.^^

in fact, the national policy on land grants for education between
1820-1865 placed no restriction on participation by private or church
schools.

The Supreme Court noted that "before 1895 the Government for a
number of years had made contracts for sectarian schools for the
education of the Indians.

in 1852, the Cl.S. Senate issued a report in response to repeated
expressions of concern about abolishing military chaplains.

The report said the "establishment of religion" meant "the
connection with the State of a particular religious society by its
endowment at the public expense, in exclusion of, or in preference to
any other, by giving to its members exclusive political rights, and by
compelling the attendance of those who rejected its communion . . .or
religious observances."^^

in 1888, mission schools in Alaska received $112,000. The
denominational breakdown was: Episcopal, $30,000; Catholic,
$25,000; Moravian, $25,000; Presbyterian, $15,000; Swedish
Evangelical, $15,000; and Reformed Episcopal, $1,000.^®

Finally, private sectarian schools shared in all Federal emergency
programs in the Great Depression of the 1930s, and in war
emergency programs in the 1940s.^^

Messages and Addresses of Presidents

in his well-known Farewell Address, President George Washington
said:

"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political
prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports . .

. [L]et it simply be asked where is the security for prosperity,
for reputation, for life--if the sense of religious obligation
desert? . . .

"[A]nd let us with caution indulge the supposition that
morality can be maintained without religion."^®

Although nearly all Presidents referred to Almighty God,
Providence, our Creator, etc., in their inaugural addresses. Presidents
John Adams, William Henry Harrison, James Buchanan and
Abraham Lincoln specifically noted the nation's identification with

132

Christianity.^®

Days Of Thanksgiving And Prayer

Days of prayer, thanksgiving and fasting go back to the early days
under the Constitution. A Day of Prayer And Thanksgiving was
proclaimed by George Washington in 1789, and similar proclamations
were made intermittently until 1815.

It was not until Jan. 4, 1861 that another Day of Prayer was
proclaimed by President Lincoln. Three similar proclamations were
made that same year, followed by similar invocations in 1864 and
1865.

Again there was a hiatus until the Clnited States was on the brink of
war, and President Franklin D. Roosevelt set aside a Day of Prayer.
Similar Days were annually marked until 1945. Another interruption
followed until 1952, when the practice of reserving a Day of Prayer
was resumed. Days of Prayer have been proclaimed annually since
that time.

Thanksgiving Day was first established officially in 1863, and has
been marked every subsequent year.'^®

It also is worthy of note that President James Madison sent a
Message to Congress on June 1, 1812 recommending that Members
consider entrusting the "just cause [the War of 1812] into the hands of
the Almighty.

Just over two months later, Madison again urged the nation to
render to "the Sovereign of the Clniverse and the Benefactor of
Mankind the public homage due to His holy attributes." The President
sought God's "merciful forgiveness and His assistance." Mr. Madison
further asked that God inspire all nations with "a love of Justice and of
concord, and with a reverence for the unerring precept of our holy
religion to do to others as they would require that others should do to
them . . ."42

Earlier Supreme Court Decisions

In addition to the previously cited Supreme Court decision in
Church of the Holy Trinity, the high bench has identified the Clnited
States as a Christian nation on several other occasions. Also, Justice
Joseph Story, a recognized authority on the Constitution, who was
appointed to the Supreme Court by James Madison, expressed the
same opinion in his Commentaries on the Constitution.

Terret v. Taylor: This 1815 case concerned an effort by the State of
Virginia to turn over to public officials glebe lands of the Episcopal
Church which had been confiscated during the Revolutionary War.

133

Justice Story, speaking for a unanimous Court, said:

"The legislature could not create or continue a religious
establishment which would have exclusive rights and
prerogatives, or compel the citizens to worship under a
stipulated form of discipline, or to pay taxes to those whose
creed they could not conscientiously believe. But the free
exercise of religion cannot be justly deemed to be restrained
by aiding with equal attention the votaries of every sect to
perform their own religious duties, or by establishing funds for
the support of ministers, for public charities, for the
endowment of churches, or for the sepulture of the dead."^^

In his Commentaries, which were a major formative influence on
American jurisprudence. Justice Story wrote:

"... it is impossible for those who believe in the truth of
Christianity as a divine revelation to doubt that it is the
especial duty of government to foster and encourage it among
all the citizens and subjects. This is a point wholly distinct
from that of the right of private judgment in matters of religion,
and of the freedom of public worship according to the dictates
of one's conscience.

"Every American colony from its foundation down to the
revolution, with the possible exception of Rhode Island, did
openly, by the whole course of its laws and institutions,
support and sustain, in some form, the Christian religion, and
almost invariably gave a peculiar sanction to some of its
fundamental doctrines. And this has continued to be the case
in some of the States down to the present period, without the
slightest suspicion that it was against the principles of public
law or republican liberty.

"Probably at the time of the adoption of the Constitution,
and the amendments to it, the general, if not universal
sentiment in America was that Christianity ought to receive
encouragement from the State so far as was not incompatible
with the private rights of conscience and the freedom of
religious worship.

"The real object of the [First] Amendment was not to
countenance, much less to advance Mahometanism, or

134

Judaism, or infidelity by prostrating Christianity; but to
exclude all rivalry among Christian sects, and to prevent any
national, ecclesiastical establishment [from being given] the
exclusive patronage of the national government.

Vidal V. Girard's Executors (1844)

The Supreme Court was presented with a controversy involving
the will of Girard, who had established a school for white males. The
will stipulated that no ecclesiastic, missionary or minister of any sect
was to hold any position at the school or even to visit it. By
implication, the will excluded all instruction in the Christian religion.
The Court said:

" . . .we are compelled to admit that although Christianity
be a part of the common law of the state [Pennsylvania], yet it
is so in this qualified sense, that its divine origin and truth are
admitted, and therefore it is not to be maliciously and openly
reviled and blasphemed against, to the annoyance of
believers or the injury of the public . . .

"It is unnecessary for us, however, to consider what would
be the legal effect of a devise in Pennsylvania for the
establishment of a school or college, for the propagation of
Judaism or Deism, or any other form of infidelity. Such a case
is not to be presumed to exist in a Christian country; and
therefore it must be made out by clear and indisputable proof.

"Where can the purest principles of morality be learned
so clearly or so perfectly as from the New Testament? Where
are benevolence, the love of truth, sobriety, and industry, so
powerfully and irresistibly inculcated as in the sacred
volume? . . .

"It has hitherto been thought sufficient if [a charitable
donor] does not require anything to be taught inconsistent with
Christianity."^®

Mormon Church v. United States (1889)

The case involved Mormon belief in polygamy, which the Court
said was "a blot on our civilization." Continuing, the Court declared
the following:

"It [polygamy] is contrary to the spirit of Christianity and

135

of the civilization which Christianity has produced in the
Western world.

CJ.S. V. Macintosh (1931)

The case involved a Canadian immigrant who balked at taking up
arms to defend the Clnited States, because the requirement conflicted
with his religious beliefs. In handing down its decision, the Court
remarked:

"We are a Christian people (Holy Trinity Church v. Clnited
States . . .), according to one another the equal right of
religious freedom, and acknowledging with reverence the duty
of obedience to the will of God . . ."‘^®

That is the rather formidable public record of support for religion
and Christianity by the three branches of government, from the time
the religion clause was proposed, drafted and ratified--until 1947.

The Masonic View Of The Religion Clause

That historic record, impressive as it is, proved woefully
inadequate to deter Masonry from imposing its philosophy of
Kabbalistic Gnosticism upon the nation, beginning at the elementary
school level.

How did it happen?

The key to effecting that Masonic goal was to sweep aside the
reality of history by "interpretation" of the Constitution.

"Law," said one Masonic author in 1933, "is largely in the
interpretation and not in the text. . .

Two years later, a powerful member of the Craft, President
Franklin D. Roosevelt, in his January 6, 1937 Message To Congress,
commented: "The vital need is not an alteration of our fundamental
law, but an increasingly enlightened view in reference to it."^®

The President's remarks were made as he was attempting to
implement his "court-packing" plan. It also was the time when Justice
Hugo L. Black took a seat on the Supreme Court.

In 1941, another member of the Craft, Justice Robert H. Jackson,
wrote that the Constitution and its amendments "are what the judges
say they are."^^

Brother Jackson candidly admitted that he, and those who shared
his viewpoint on the Constitution, had succeeded in their efforts to

136

shape that charter of liberty by influencing the choice of "forward-
looking" Justices.

Although not noted by Mr. Jackson, it so happened that those
Justices like President Roosevelt and Justice Black, were, in
overwhelming numbers, members of the Masonic Fraternity.

Meanwhile, beginning in 1935, and continuing through the mid-
1940s, the New Age carried on a massive propaganda campaign
against State assistance for transportation of children to Catholic
schools.

Five years later, that effort was expanded by the Scottish Rite to
include opposition not only to prayer and Bible reading in public
schools, but also to released time for religious instruction of students
at such schools.

Blueprint For Court's Re-Direction

Of even more interest is the fact that the Scottish Rite journal, and
the Grand Commander of the Southern Jurisdiction, advanced
arguments against aid to religious education which appeared to be,
curiously, like blueprints for the line of reasoning the Masonically
dominated Court would soon follow in its "interpretation" of the
religion-clause.

The Masonic mode of interpreting the religion-clause of the
Constitution began in earnest in 1935.

in November of that year, the New Age ran a commentary
opposing aid to parochial schools, in support of that position, the
magazine advanced the argument that such assistance was contrary
to James Madison's "Memorial and Remonstrance," which said, in
part:

"Because it is proper to take alarm at the first experiment
on our liberties . . .The freemen of America did not wait till
usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and
entangled the question in precedents . . .Who does not see
that . . .the same authority which can force a citizen to
contribute three pence only of his property for the support of
any one establishment, may force him to conform to any
other establishment in all cases whatsoever?"^^

About a year and a half later (April, 1937), Elmer Rogers, editor of
the New Age and executive assistant to the Grand Commander of the

137

Scottish Rite of the Southern Jurisdiction, appeared as a witness
before the House Committee on Education to oppose legislation
which would authorize federal funds for education. Speaking for the
Grand Commander, Rogers said the Craft feared some of the funds
might be diverted to Catholic schools.

To support his position the Masonic official called attention to a
statement by a Rev. Thomas E. Little, a man who shared the Scottish
Rite viewpoint on education, and whose statement cited the same
quotation from Madison's "Memorial and Remonstrance" as had
appeared in the New Age 17 months earlier.^®

Also in his testimony, Rogers called attention to four prior
Supreme Court decisions which, in his view, confirmed that the Court
had found State aid to religion to be unconstitutional. The cases cited
were: Watson v. Jones, 13 Wallace 679 (1871); Davis v. Beason, 133
Cl.S. 333 (1890); Reynolds v. Clnited States, 98 Cl.S. 145 (1878); and
Reuben Quick Bear v. Leupp, 210 Cl.S. 50 (1908).^^

In April, 1940, a New Age editorial expressing opposition to aid for
"sectarian purposes" said Madison's "Memorial Remonstrance" and
Jefferson's Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom (in Virginia) "were
the principles and precedents out of which was formed the Bill of
Rights."^®

The Masonic Argument In Perspective

Madison, Jefferson, and Virginia

Madison's "Memorial and Remonstrance" (written in 1785), and
Jefferson's Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom (written in 1786)
concerned religious freedom in one state, Virginia, several years prior
to the time the religion-clause was proposed, composed, approved
and ratified.

Neither document was discussed during debates in the
Constitutional Convention, nor were they ever mentioned during
discussions when the religion-clause was being crafted by members
of the House and Senate.

Jefferson, it might be noted, was in France when the First
Amendment was discussed in Congress and adopted by the people.

Madison, as the record of House debate on that clause shows, was
unsuccessful in having any of his proposed language on the subject
accepted by his colleagues. Indeed, he withdrew his last proposal for
fashioning the clause.

138

During House debate on the religion-clause, the person in the First
Congress who proposed language most closely resembling the
wording of that provision as we know it today was Congressman
Fisher Ames of Massachusetts, not James Madison of Virginia.^®

Further, Madison and Jefferson's own State, Virginia, not only was
the reluctant and last State to ratify the first Ten Amendments to the
Constitution (on December 15, 1791), but members of the Virginia
legislature expressly declared that the religion-clause permits the use
of tax money "for the support of religion or its preachers." That view is
evident in The Journal of the Virginia Senate (1789), which states:

"We the underwritten members of the majority on that
question deem it incumbent on us [to express] . . .our
objections to those articles [i.e., amendments] . . .

"The third amendment [the present First Amendment to
the Constitution] recommended by Congress does not prohibit
the rights of conscience from being violated or infringed; and
although it goes to restrain Congress from passing laws
establishing any national religion, they might,
notwithstanding, levy taxes to any amount for the support of
religion or its preachers; and any particular denomination of
Christians might be so favored and supported by the general
government as to give it a decided advantage over the others,
and in the process of time render it powerful and dangerous
as if it was established as the national religion of the
country."®®

Earlier Court Decisions: Reynolds, Beason, Watson

The Reynolds and Beason cases were concerned with bigamy and
polygamy, practices commonly engaged in by Mormons at that time
as a matter of religious belief, despite the fact that having a plurality
of wives was a statutory crime.

The common consensus against polygamy was so widespread in
"a Christian nation" that it was condemned by Congressional statute,
judicial decisions, and Presidential statements.

Presidents James Garfield and Grover Cleveland condemned
polygamy in their Inaugural Addresses of 1881 and 1885,
respectively.®^

Thus, that particular religious belief was strongly opposed by the
three branches of government, clearly demonstrating that there are
limits to the free exercise of religion under the Constitution.

Actually, as the following discussion of the Court's decisions in the

139

cited cases evidences, the high bench consistently demonstrated
uninterrupted support for Christian values and beliefs.

In the Reynolds case, George Reynolds, a Mormon, had been
charged with committing bigamy in the Territory of Utah, where the
act was a crime according to federal law.

In rendering its decision, the Court established two Constitutional
principles: First, it provided a definition for the word "religion" in the
First Amendment; and, second, it ruled how "free" the "free exercise"
of religion really is.

The Court noted that the word "religion" is not defined in the
Constitution. Consequently, it was necessary to look elsewhere to find
the meaning of the word in "the history of the times in the midst of
which the provision was adopted."

The Court then cited Madison's "Memorial and Remonstrance"
where he had demonstrated that "religion, or the duty we owe the
Creator," was not within cognizance of the civil government.

The high bench also observed that Jefferson's Bill for Religious
Freedom, approved by the Virginia legislature, had defined "religion"
exactly as had Madison in his "Memorial."®^

Further, the Bill said civil government can only interfere with
religious belief "when principles break out into overt acts against
peace and good order."

That provision of the Bill, said the Court, provides "the true
distinction between what properly belongs to the church and what to
the state."

The Court also referenced Jefferson's reply to an address he had
received from the Danbury, Connecticut Baptist Association. He told
the group the religion-clause, in his view, built "a wall of separation
between church and state."

Explaining, he said he was convinced man "has no natural right in
opposition to his social duties."

Addressing its own understanding of those historic documents, the
Court declared: "Congress was deprived of all legislative power over
mere opinion, but was left free to reach actions which were in
violation of social duties or subversive to good order."

Continuing, the opinion noted that polygamy has always been
"odious among the northern and western nations of Europe and, until
the establishment of the Mormon Church, was almost exclusively a
feature of the life of Asiatic and of African people. At common law, the
second marriage was always void . . .and from the earliest history of
England polygamy has been treated as an offense against society."

The Court said English ecclesiastical courts, as well as civil

140

courts, punished polygamy, and that by the statute of James I, the
penalty for polygamy was death.

In Davis v. Beason, the Court conceded the right to religious
belief, but cautioned that the First Amendment prohibits legislation for
"the support of any religious tenets, or the modes of worship of any
sect."

Despite that holding, the Court strongly supported the Christian
concept of the marriage bond, thus tacitly recognizing that the
Constitution protects that particular Christian belief.

The decision observed that bigamy and polygamy are crimes "by
the laws of all civilized and Christian countries."®"^

Continuing, the majority ruling said:

"Certainly no legislation can be supposed more
wholesome and necessary in the founding of a free, self-
governing Commonwealth, fit to take rank as one of the
coordinate States of the Onion, than that which seeks to
establish it on the basis of the idea of the family, as
constituting in and springing from the union for life of one man
and one woman in the holy estate of matrimony; the sure
foundation of all that is stable and noble in our civilization; the
best guaranty of that reverent morality which is the source of
all beneficent progress in social and political improvement.

And to this end, no means are more directly and immediately
suitable than those provided by this [statute] which endeavors
to withdraw all political influence from those who are
practically hostile to its attainment."®^

The Watson v. Jones case was concerned with property rights of
religious societies. The Court affirmed the obvious when it
emphasized it had no Jurisdiction on questions of church discipline.
The high bench said "total subversion of . . .religious bodies" would
be effected if any member of such society aggrieved by the church's
"decisions could appeal to the secular courts and have them
reversed."®®

The Court enunciated what Reynolds later affirmed. It said: "In this
country the full and free right to entertain any religious belief, to
practice any religious principle, and to teach any religious doctrine--
which does not violate the laws of morality and property, and which
does not infringe personal rights--is conceded to all. The law knows
no heresy, and is committed to the support of no dogma, the

141

establishment of no sect.

m67

The above excerpts abundantly manifest that the decisions in both
Reynolds and Season supported the Christian beliefs and practices
regarding marriage.

Further emphasizing that position was the Court's reference to the
northern and western nations of Europe, which were Christian, as was
England and its "ecclesiastical courts." The Asiatic and African
people, referred to in Season, were largely non-Christian, and mostly
Muslim.

in Season, too, the Court spoke with approval regarding the
attitude of "Christian countries" toward marriage, it also praised the
concept of "family" springing "from the union for life of one man and
one woman in the holy estate of matrimony." Certainly, such a view of
marriage has been unique to Christianity (see Matthew 19:6-12).

Sut the Court went a step beyond, it supported the right of
Congress to pass, and the President to sign into law, an Act which
withdrew "all political influence from those who are practically
hostile" to the Christian view of marriage.

There also is the matter of the "religion" protected by the First
Amendment, in both Reynolds and Season, the Court accepted the
definition which says "religion" in the religion clause means a
philosophy or view of life which recognizes the existence of "our
Creator," as well as a "duty" owed to that Being. That viewpoint is
consistent with the Court's opinions in Vidal v. Girard, in 1844, and
Holy Trinity, in 1892. it also mirrors the interpretation of Mr. Justice
Story in his Commentaries.®®

Obviously, Masonic spokesmen and their philosophical allies can
cite isolated words or phrases culled from earlier Court decisions to
suggest that precedent Court rulings support their view of the religion-
clause. However, when those citations are placed in context they
serve to reaffirm and illuminate the fact that the Supreme Court--up
until the time it was packed with Freemasons in the 1940s--had
consistently enunciated a view which held that basic Christian values
are to be protected by the government because that is the will of the
people, and because it is in the best interests of society at large.

142

7/ DEFUSING THE PAROCHIAL
AID BOMB

By the 1940s, the rush of events and precedents by the three
branches of government enhancing religious equality seemed to
militate strongly against Masonry's efforts to control America's
educational agenda.

The growing Catholic membership in Congress particularly
worried Scottish Rite leaders and, as was noted above, militated
against the Fraternity's efforts to enact its own federal education
legislation. In fact, it seemed that a rapidly growing sense of fairness
and equity was moving inexorably toward granting federal aid to non¬
public school students.

For example, in 1940, the Fraternity opposed a pending
Congressional proposal which would allow States to make available
to parochial-school children "any services of health, welfare, books,
reading materials, or transportation . . .that may be made available"
through federal funding for children in public schools.^

The New Age said such legislation demonstrated that "many of
our legislators are succumbing to the desire to hold office" by
supporting aid to non-public schools.^

"The G.I. Bill of Rights"

However, the major educational skirmish lost by the Fraternity
was enactment of the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944,
popularly known as "The G.I. Bill Of Rights."

The new law (which had been supported by the American Legion
and the House Committee on World War Veterans) provided a wide
range of benefits for returning veterans, including virtually free
education in the school of the returning serviceman's choice--even in
religious seminaries. It was a devastating blow to Masonry's efforts to
deny government assistance to "sectarian" institutions.

The Craft and its allies were particularly outraged by a unique
aspect of the law which empowered the Administrator of Veterans
Affairs to provide aid directly to religiously affiliated schools, which

143

otherwise were barred from receiving tax support by State statutes or
constitutional provisions.^

Opponents of that aspect of the "G.l. Bill" rightly suspected the
"State by-pass" provision would set a precedent for appropriating
federal funds for Catholic and other religiously affiliated schools.

Surprisingly, however, the hearing record which preceded debate
and enactment of the legislation fails to show that any Masonic
Supreme Council official testified for or against the legislation.'^

Nevertheless, Craft sentiment was clearly evident during floor
debate on the measure. The strong undercurrent of opposition to the
"State by-pass" provision paralleled Masonic thinking on the issue.

In fact, a substitute bill, introduced by Rep. Craham Barden (D.,
NC), a Mason, was almost identical to the proposal approved by the
American Legion and the House Committee on World War Veterans--
except that Barden's Bill eliminated the power of school selection by
the Administrator.

However, not once during the rather protracted debate in the
House and Senate on the legislation was it ever suggested that
providing funds to religiously affiliated institutions violated the religion
clause of the First Amendment.^

During House debate. Rep. Fred Busbey (R., IL) asked his
colleague, Walter Judd (R., MN), about the possibility of veterans
attending theological seminaries. Judd replied that they should be
allowed to do so as long as the schools were properly equipped and
staffed.®

Senator Ernest McFarland (D., AZ) said: "It is important that the
veteran be given the privilege of choosing his own school. This is in
accordance with the American system which has prevailed during all
these years . . . No man should be compelled to attend a school
which is not his own choice."^

Rep. William Cole (R., NY) asked why the Administrator was
authorized to designate certain schools. Rep. John Rankin (D., MS),
floor manager of the legislation, replied that there "might be some
private schools that the public authorities would not want to
recognize."®

Rep. Thomas Abernethy (D., MS), commenting during an
extensive discussion about federal usurpation of State control of
education, said the legislation "is a veteran's bill," and that a returning
serviceman or woman "may select, free of even the most
infinitesimal dictation of any individual, a school of his (her)
choice."®

Rep. Edith Nourse Rogers (R., MA), said the committee bill gave

144

no control over "private or religious schools or institutions" to any
State or State agency.

On the other hand, she observed, the Barden substitute proposal
"gives the State agency control over such institutions." That aspect of
the Barden Bill, she said, "poses for consideration of Congress the
question of academic freedom and individual initiative."^®

Rep. Asa Allen (D., LA) pointed out that the committee bill was
intended to guarantee "the greatest liberty of choice and the greatest
possible liberty of action." After all, he continued, "that is democracy,
is that not what the boys are fighting for?"^ ^

Lengthy debate occurred regarding a letter each Congressman
had received from Dr. Cloyd H. Marvin, president of George
Washington CJniversity. The letter, dated May 11, 1944, was written on
behalf of the Conference of Representatives of Educational
Associations, and urged defeat of the committee bill and passage of
the Barden Bill.

in his letter. Dr. Marvin said he and his group favored the Barden
Bill "because we cannot maintain two systems to interfere with
regular education policies."

The Barden Bill, as Mrs. Rogers and others had noted, would
almost certainly prohibit veterans from attending Catholic or other
religiously affiliated schools.

Surprisingly, among the 21 groups co-signing Dr. Marvin's letter
was the National Catholic Education Association.^^

The final vote on the "G.l. Bill" showed that the Congressmen
faced a political dilemma. They were caught between the pressures
brought by Masonry (and the hardly distinguishable pressures exerted
by the educational establishment) on the one hand, and
countervailing pressure from the general public and veterans' groups
on the other.

The Senate voted 50 to 0 for the bill. However, nearly half of the 96
Senators failed to vote for the legislation, even though it had 81 co¬
sponsors.^^

The House voted 388 to 0 for the bill, with 41 Representatives not
voting.

Certainly, it was virtually impossible to oppose assistance to men
and women who were serving the nation at a desperate hour, many of
whom were being wounded or killed in battle in Europe and the
Pacific.

The Catholic populace had a particularly vital stake in the
legislation. For years. Masonic subterfuge had been successful in
denying Catholic students an equitable share in tax benefits. Now,

145

when the Catholic population of the CJnited States was a mere 18
percent, it was reported, on August 31, 1943, that "the religious
preference of American soldiers was 31 percent Catholic." And,
according to the National Catholic Almanac, the "distribution of
Catholics was probably higher in the Navy and Marine Corps than in
the Army." it was inconceivable that the national legislature would
deny educational benefits in the schools of choice for those
profoundly patriotic men and women.

Meanwhile, the public and the Congress were largely ignorant of
the fact that Dr. Marvin, the man who had exerted so much pressure
to substitute the anti-Catholic Barden Bill, was a 33rd degree Mason
who presided over a university which had received $1,000,000 from
the Scottish Rite to operate a school of government that specializes in
foreign affairs.^®

in addition to contributions from the Scottish Rite, Dr. Marvin noted
that George Washington Clniversity also received substantial
contributions from the National League of Masonic Clubs, The High
Twelve International, and the Knights Templars, all of which are
Masonic groups.

Masons, Dr. Marvin said, serve the nation by making
recommendations relative to the "character, mental capacity, and
social attitudes of those who should be set aside by our society for
leadership."^®

Parochial School Aid At The Threshold

in December, 1944, six months after the "G.l. Bill" became law, an
Advisory Committee to the House Education panel issued a report
recommending federal funds for private colleges and universities.

Commenting editorially on the Committee report, America
magazine said: " . . .since existing State laws forbid State allocation of
funds to private institutions, arrangements will be made to pay federal
funds directly to institutions and individuals."^®

Soon thereafter, on January 9, 10, 1945, legislation sponsored by
the National Education Association (NEA)--an organization that
historically has been closely tied to Scottish Rite Freemasonry--was
introduced in the House and Senate, it provided substantial funds for
public education, but made no provision for assisting non-public
schools.

The Senate version became the dominant proposal, known as S.
181. Among its principal sponsors was Senator Lister Hill (D., AL), a

146

Mason, and the man who had replaced Sen. Hugo L. Black when the
latter went to the Supreme Court.^®

At a January 23rd conference on education sponsored by The
New York Times, Sen. Hill said that his bill stood a better chance of
passage "than at any other time in the many years since it has been
introduced.

On January 31, 1945, Elmer Rogers, executive aide to the
Sovereign Grand Commander of the Scottish Rite of the Southern
Jurisdiction, and associate editor of the organization's publications,
appeared before the Senate Education and Labor committee to
express opposition to S.181. He told the Senate panel the bill "does
not give . . .assurance" that parochial schools could not receive
government benefits.

The Scottish Rite official referred to a study by Fordham
Clniversity's Institute of Educational Research which found that direct
appropriations of public money to Catholic schools would be legal.

Rogers then made reference to selective excerpts from Pope Leo
Xlll's Encyclical Letter Humanum Genus (but the Scottish Rite official
never mentioned that the Papal letter was against Freemasonry, nor
that it detailed Masonry's long revolutionary history, and its particular
dedication to controlling education in every nation).

The excerpts chosen by Rogers purported to show that Catholic
Church teaching is incompatible with the Constitution of the CJnited
States.

Rogers invited attention to the identical Supreme Court opinions
cited in his 1937 testimony before the House Committee on
Education: Davis v. Beason, Watson v. Jones, Reynolds v. CJ.S., and
Reuben Quick Bear v. Leupp.^^

As an interesting sidelight, the hearings revealed that an
ostensibly pro-public-school group apparently served as a front for
Scottish Rite Freemasonry.

General Amos Fries, appearing on behalf of a one-thousand-
member group called Friends of the Public Schools, testified in
opposition to federal aid to education. During a colloquy with Sen.
William Fulbright (D., AR), the General said his organization
distributed approximately 32,000 copies of its bulletin. Explaining,
under Senatorial questioning, how a small organization could
distribute its publication in quantities 32 times larger than the
organization's membership. Fries disclosed that the "principal
contributor" to his organization was the Supreme Council of the
Scottish Rite of the Southern Jurisdiction.^®

He provided the Committee with a typical Bulletin issued by his

147

group. Bulletin No. 79 (undated) listed under the heading, "What We
Have Opposed," the following: "(f) taking time out . . .of school . . .to
send children, whose parents request it, to different sectarian religious
centers for instruction in the tenets of their particular religion.

Less than a month after the hearings concluded. Senators James
Mead (D., NY) and George Aiken (R., VT) introduced S.717, a related
education aid bill. CJnlike its predecessor, S.181, the new measure
would provide aid to parochial schools. The legislation was largely
drafted and sponsored by the American Federation of Labor (AFL).

One key aspect of the Mead-Aiken Bill was a "State by-pass"
principle, similar to the educational provisions of "The G.l. Bill of
Rights." The new proposal established a five-man National Board of
Apportionment, appointed by the President, with consent of the
Senate. A related provision required each State to notify the Board
whether State law prohibits use of public funds in non-public schools,
if such was the case, the Board would appoint a trustee (nominated by
the State Governor) to receive and allocate funds to non-public
schools.^®

Enter Justice Black

The Mead-Aiken Bill apparently triggered a startling reaction from
a man who had a rather long record of anti-Catholicism; a man who
"would make fun of the church," in general; who "suspected the
Catholic Church," in particular; and a man, above all, who "could not
tolerate any sign of encouraging religious faith by state aid." That
man was Justice Hugo L. Black.

Black's Papers show that within a month following introduction of
the Mead-Aiken Bill, he wrote a "Dear Lister" letter to Sen. Lister Hill,
to which he appended issue No. 61 of the Scottish Rite News Bulletin,
dated April 5, 1945. The letter said:

"You will doubtless be interested in this document insofar
as it may affect you personally, and because it may also
affect the fate of your Federal Aid to Education Bill."

Black went on to note that the last page of the Scottish Rite
publication contained five educational principles favored by the
Supreme Council. The first principle, he noted, endorses:

"The American public school, non-partisan, non¬
sectarian, efficient, democratic, for all of the children of all of

148

the people."^®

Black did not repeat the fifth Masonic principle, which also
appeared on the last page of that issue of the Bulletin--and regularly
appears in most Scottish Rite publications. That principle said:

"5. The entire separation of Church and State, and
opposition to every attempt to appropriate public moneys--
federal, state or local--directly or indirectly, for the support of
sectarian or private institutions."^^

The letter to Sen. Hill continued by noting that articles in the April
5 edition of the Bulletin "appear to be in conflict with the spirit if not
with the letter of this expressed Council policy." All of them, he said,
"are against Federal aid intended to bring about the type of schools
described in principle 1."

Black said articles in the Bulletin suggest that the editors "do not
oppose political appointments as such, but merely those made by the
Federal Government."

The former Alabama Senator also noted that the Hill Bill was
based on the premise that the "American public school" cannot be
"efficient, democratic, for all of the children of all of the people"
unless there are funds available to make them such, and that some of
the States are unable without federal assistance to provide adequate
funds to maintain such schools.

Continuing, he said: "Without challenging this premise at all, the
Editors of the [Bulletin] make artificial State boundary lines
sacrosanct and argue against making the entire wealth of all of
America available for educational use for 'all of the children of all of
the people.'

"This leads me to believe that the Supreme Council favors a
course which the publishers of the Bulletin are betraying. They have
gathered together a group of articles which use all the old cliches of
numerous tax dodgers' leagues which exalt individual wealth above
individual educational opportunities of the children.

"You know the influence of the Scottish Rite Masons in Alabama
and elsewhere, if you and others do not challenge this activity, you
will hear from it later in connection with the passage of your Bill and
future elections. My belief is that this Bulletin runs counter to the basic
precepts of Masonry, if 1 thought that the Scottish Rite organization had
dedicated its efforts along the lines indicated by the Bulletin, 1 should
immediately resign my membership which has been held for more
than 25 years.

149

"My guess is if you will talk to Elmer Rogers you will find that the
policies emphasized in the Bulletin chiefly represent the views of one
man who happens to hold a position of influence there. If 1 were not on
the court, 1 should challenge them immediately, and 1 hope that
someone else will do so."^^

Justice Black's Papers contained no response from Senator Hill.
Efforts to obtain permission from Senator Hill's daughter, Mrs.
Henrietta Hubbard, to review her father's Papers for any response that
might have been made to Justice Black's letter, met with negative
results.

On April 23, Black wrote to Rogers, referencing the "last few
issues" of the Bulletin, and the articles opposing federal aid to
education. As he had to Sen. Hill, so to Rogers, he called attention to
the first principle favored by the Fraternity, the public school "for all of
the children of all of the people," a statement which he underlined. He
asked his friend, Rogers, to inform him whether or not the "Supreme
Council" has taken a position against federal aid to education.

Rogers responded to Black on April 27. He informed the Justice
that he had referred his letter to the Grand Commander, who "asked
that 1 reply as follows:"

The rather formal response simply noted that the Fraternity had
"for many years" favored a Department of Education, but recent
legislation began to carry appropriations for millions of dollars, and
the Supreme Council "feared that such appropriations would lead to
federal control of education.

In the same file in Black's Papers is a copy of issue No. 62 of the
Scottish Rite News Bulletin, dated April 20, 1945. The lead article by
Rogers, titled, "More About Senate Bill 717," notes that if the Mead-
Aiken Bill was enacted "it would, in effect, annul those provisions in
state constitutions which prohibit their legislatures from aiding
sectarian schools out of public funds.

The fact that Black admitted he had read "the last few issues" of
the Bulletin makes it clear that he knew precisely what the Scottish
Rite position was.

But Black pursued the subject further. On April 30, he wrote to
A.B. Andrews at the Scottish Rite Masonic Temple, Birmingham,
Alabama, to inquire whether the Alabama Scottish Rite was working to
defeat Congressional legislation to provide educational aid to the
States.

Black added: "In my present position I do not desire to become
involved in any controversy over pending legislation."^^

No reply from Andrews could be located among Black's Papers.

150

Black's letters to Sen. Hill, Rogers, and Andrews seemed curious.
As a man who admitted reading Masonic publications, and as a
member of the Craft for 25 years, it is reasonable to assume that he
was aware that Freemasonry had been pressing for federal aid to
public education since the 1920s. Moreover, he expressly favored
Senator Hill's anti-parochial-school bill, and emphasized public
school "for all of the children of all of the people." Moreover, the
Scottish Rite's five principles, to which he alluded, demonstrated that
the Craft was a staunch supporter of public schools.

it was clear, too, that Black was interested in bringing to bear "the
influence of Scottish Rite Masons," and suggested that Sen. Hill "talk
to Elmer Rogers . . .who happens to hold a position of influence ..."

it is curious, too, that Black said, "if 1 were not on the Court, 1
should challenge them immediately, and 1 hope that someone else
will do so." it is curious, because almost immediately after saying
that, he took the initiative to write to two Masonic officials to question
the Scottish Rite position opposing aid to education.

Moreover, Black's ethics as a sitting Justice are certainly suspect
for initiating a letter of support to one of the chief sponsors of a bill
which would provide government assistance to public schools only. A
further breach of judicial ethics was his condemnation of an
organization which opposed the legislation. His behavior also is
questionable for suggesting a "challenge" to a powerful group which
ostensibly was opposing the legislation.

Actually, the April 5 Bulletin must have made it clear to Black that
Brother Rogers was opposing only legislation which would aid
Catholic schools. Nowhere did Black himself indicate that he
supported equitable aid to non-public schools.

A front page article by Rogers in the April 5, 1945 Scottish Rite
News Bulletin stated:

"The bill's scheme to make public funds available to
sectarian schools treats with contempt the principles set forth
in Madison's Memorial of 1784 and the same principles
affirmed later by Thomas Jefferson in his Act for Religious
Freedom in the Legislature of Virginia, to say nothing of the
curse that sectarian schools supported by public funds has
inflicted upon man.

"The enactment of S.717 would reverse the declaration of
Congress in Indian school matters which stated it to be the
settled policy of the Government hereafter to make no
appropriations whatever for education in any sectarian school.
Moreover, in this connection, S.717 ignores the decision of the

151

United States Supreme Court in the case of Reuben Quick
Bear v. Leupp (210 CJ.S. 50, 1908) which held, in part, that the
general appropriations Act of 1895, 1896 and 1897 forbid
contracts for the education of Indians in sectarian schools out
of public funds . .

The Assault On Parochial Aid

A week after Justice Black's letter to Sen. Hill, the Senate
Education and Labor Committee began a second series of hearings
on the education legislation, focusing mostly on objections by Masons
and the Educational Establishment to the Mead-Aiken bill.

On April 11, Matthew Woll, Vice President of the AFL and
chairman of that organization's Committee on Education, appeared
before the Committee and said any education legislation considered
by Congress must be "without prejudice to any child."

After noting that the AFL had fought anti-Negro discrimination, he
observed:

"But discrimination is not limited to racial issues.

Religious prejudice also gives rise to discrimination."

Citing the Cochran textbook case, he said the Court held that "all
children . . .should be helped to get an education.

But Senator Forrest Donnell (R., MO), a 33rd Degree Mason and
former Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Missouri, was relentless in
his questioning of anyone who favored aid to parochial schools. He
insisted that the "State by-pass" provision was "subterfuge to avoid
the provisions of the State constitutions."

Woll replied that "it does circumvent State law openly. That is not
subterfuge.'"'^®

The following colloquy ensued:

Senator Donnell: It would be for the purpose, however, of enabling
the distribution of funds by an official appointed by the Governor of a
State in which the law would prohibit the distribution by the State.

Mr. Woll: Haven't we been doing that before?

Senator Donnell: This is the purpose, is it not, of that provision?

Mr. Woll: Haven't we been doing that before?

Senator Donnell: Would you mind answering that question? That is
the purpose of that provision, is it not?

Mr. Woll: Certainly it is. Haven't we done that heretofore with the

152

N.Y.A. [National Youth Administration], in distributing moneys this
way?

Senator Donnell: I am not certain as to whether that has been
done or not.

Mr. Woll: It has been done heretofore.^^

The following day, George L. Googe, Southern Representative of
the AFL, appeared before the Senate Committee to complain that
statements about "Onion of church and state," and "Destruction of the
free public school system," are "Shibboleths" and "empty phrases."

He noted that the ROTC (Reserve Officer Training Corps) program
at public and non-public schools and colleges did not lead to the
destruction of the free public school system.

The present danger, he insisted, is not from the church taking over
the State, but "the growing power of the State over the conduct of the
individual human being."

Stateism, he said, is "a pure Helgelian concept--is the very basis
of nazism, which is on the march in this country.""^^

Senator Donnell vigorously pursued his questioning of Googe, and
would repeatedly interrupt the witness before the labor official could
finish his statement; or the Senator would interrupt him with: "Just
answer my question.

The Missouri Republican said the Continental Congress had made
land available for "religious" purposes only on a couple of occasions,
and it did so because the government was desperately in need of
money. In trying to press home an admission of that view on Selma
Borchardt, vice president of the American Federation of Teachers, an
AFL affiliate and a vigorous proponent of aid to non-public-school
students, the labor official replied:

"I am always at a loss to interpret pressures at a long
distance. When I am close at hand and can see them
operating, as in the case now being heard, I have little
difficulty in interpreting such pressures.

On May 4, 1945, The Scottish Rite's Elmer Rogers again testified
on behalf of the Grand Commander and himself. The Grand
Commander, in a statement read by Rogers, affirmed the truism
known since the States established their public school systems: " . .
.the American public school system, without being denominational in
its instruction, is yet one of the primary Christian institutions existing
in the world today.

153

Rogers' own statement was preceded by a listing of the same five
principles regarding education which apparently had impressed
Justice Black.

The Grand Commander's aide opposed S.717 because "sectarian
schools would become, among the nonpublic schools, the principal
beneficiaries of Federal aid. Such a status would ultimately destroy
not only the free independent character of our public schools but
would establish in our national life an interdependence of state and
church."47

Once again, he said aid to parochial schools would be contrary to
Madison's "Memorial and Remonstrance" and Jefferson's Act for
Religious Freedom in the Legislature of Virginia. And, he added, it
would ignore the principles of the CJ.S. Supreme Court in Quick Bear
V. Leupp.''^®

Continuing, Rogers seemed to echo a sentiment voiced nearly
eight years earlier by Justice Black during his nationwide broadcast
to answer critics who were outraged by his membership in the Ku
Klux Klan. Rogers said:

"The enactment of S.717 would be a powerful lever in the
hands of sectarian interests to force States and communities
to separate the school taxes paid by these interests from the
general school taxes, and turn them over to their schools.

"Because of the baneful effects of a dominant
sectarianism in education, such action would ultimately
destroy our popular government.""^®

Continuing the same thought he referred to the Board to be
established by S.717 to "by-pass" the States whose laws prohibited
distribution of government funds for religiously oriented schools.
Rogers said it "would be, naturally, subject to great pressures from
both public and nonpublic schools."

" . . .each group would contend for the most it could get
and thus give rise to much wrangling.

"Moreover, the fight between the two kinds of nonpublic
schools, sectarian and nonsectarian, would be always tense,
to say nothing of a like feeling that would arise as between the
various religious denominations for their respective shares.

All of this will throw religion and education into State and
National politics with that acrimony and vindictive Jealousy
that always characterizes such issues."^®

154

Rogers concluded by attempting to demonstrate that education in
Catholic schools leads to criminality. His source for such a position
was an article written by "the former Catholic bishop," Dr. L.H.
Lehmann, and published in Converted Catholic Magazine, January,
1945.

The article by Lehmann was based ostensibly on a detailed
survey made by Fr. Leo Kalmer, O.F.M., and it purported to show that
the percentage of Catholic prisoners in State prisons frequently was
higher than the Catholic percentage in the population of the States in
which the prisons were located.^ ^

However, Sen. James E. Murray (D., MT) inserted in the record a
report he had received from Dr. Mary E. Walsh, assistant professor of
sociology. Catholic CJniversity of America.

Dr. Walsh's report showed that ex-bishop Lehmann did not
accurately reflect the information in the study he cited for his
statistics. The study, titled, "Crime and Religion," by Fr. Leo Kalmer
and others, showed that after parole laws went into effect in various
States, prisoners identified themselves with various religions.
Membership in a church, it seemed, was helpful in getting a parole in
that it indicated the prisoner was better than the system suggested;
also, the prisoner had the chaplain, as well as others affiliated with the
prisoner's religion, to take an interest in his parole.

CJsing Kalmer's study. Dr. Walsh demonstrated that identification of
prisoners with various church groups "suddenly rocketed"
immediately following enactment of the parole law.^^

Further, Dr. Walsh showed that in prisons at that time, "merely
hypothetical" preference for religion suffices to be identified with a
particular church, even if the prisoner never had set foot inside a
church.

Finally, the Catholic CJniversity professor demonstrated that Fr.
Kalmer's statistics showed--contrary to Lehmann's allegations--that
"the percentage of those prisoners who had 'attended public schools
only' was higher than the percentage who had 'attended Catholic
schools only.' " The respective percentages were 35.85 for criminals
identifying themselves with public schools, and 20.82 for those
criminals who claimed affiliation with the Catholic religion.

However, despite the two volumes of Senate testimony. Congress
temporarily shelved the issue on December 12, 1945, after the House
Education Committee voted (10 to 9) not to report out legislation
identical to the NEA-sponsored bill under consideration by the
Senate.

155

Nevertheless, a fact not to be overlooked is that every Member of
Congress takes an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the
CJnited States. In that regard, thirteen of the eighteen members of the
Senate Committee on Education and Labor were lawyers, including
Sen. Donnell and Sen. Wayne Morse (R., OR). Indeed, the latter had
served as dean of the CJniversity of Oregon Law School prior to his
election to the Senate. Yet, during the hearings on aid to church-
schools, no Member of Congress, and particularly no member of the
Senate Education and Labor panel, ever claimed that federal aid to
church-related schools was unconstitutional.^^

Moreover, just about that time, re-affirmation of the
Constitutionality of such assistance was further evidenced by a
recommendation of a prestigious panel appointed by President
Franklin D. Roosevelt. The Advisory Committee on Federal Aid to
Education said education legislation should be directed toward "the
benefit of pupils both in public and non-public schools."^®

Meanwhile, it is not known whether Senator Hill acceded to Justice
Black's urging and decided to "challenge" Brother Rogers. However,
subsequent to the date of Black's letter to the Alabama Senator, the
New Age ran a series of editorials under the eye-catching headline:
"CJnofficial, Read, Think, Study." The editorials warned the
Brotherhood of a purported imminent danger of a union between
Church and State--a principle staunchly opposed by Masonry, as
Black had reminded Sen. Hill.

The Masonic journal also commented on the need to oppose such
a possibility, particularly in view of alleged efforts along those lines
by the Roman Catholic Church.^^

Congress Presses On

As for Congress, it continued to be occupied with the education
issue.

Sen. Hill and several of his colleagues introduced legislation in
mid-1946 to aid public school students only, ignoring the needs of
church school students.

Addressing the issue of aid to students in the latter schools.
Senators Murray, Aiken and David 1. Walsh (D., MA) issued a joint
statement, which said:

"We have considered this problem very carefully and we

156

have concluded that such a fear is groundless. If it were not,
we would be the first to oppose such aid.

"Another tenet of our democratic belief, which we hold to
be just as sacred and important as the separation of Church
and State, is that of freedom of religion. Such freedom should
not be limited by imposing, in effect, certain penalties on
those who faithfully carry out the practice and teachings of
their religion.

"in this connection, too, we must recognize that the
Government does not wish to supplant the duty of parents in
the instruction and training of their children, but merely
wishes to supplement and facilitate it."^®

Although Congress continued to address the subject for the
remainder of 1946 and into 1947, no general aid to education
legislation was passed until eighteen years later, when the
Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965 was approved. That Act also
denied to parochial-school students full participation in benefits
bestowed by the law.

However, long before 1965, the Court, on February 10, 1947, had
handed down its ruling in the Everson case, which effectively doomed
expenditures of public funds to any significant degree for church
schools.

Everson Wends Its Way

On the eve of the Court's Everson decision, the Masons clearly
had a problem.

The historic record on the issue of government support for the
Christian religion and Christian moral education was overwhelmingly
against the Masonic viewpoint. More importantly, it appeared that in
the very near future some form of federal financial assistance would
be provided on an equitable basis to church schools.

Clearly, the Fraternity was in need of a deus ex machina--a
Masonic miracle. And it happened.

The Everson case went before the Supreme Court of New Jersey
on October 5, 1943. it involved a New Jersey law which authorized
the Township of Ewing to pay for the transportation of students to all
schools, including Catholic schools. On September 13, 1944, the
Court ruled the law unconstitutional, a decision noted by the New

157

Age.^^

Nowhere in its opinion did the New Jersey Supreme Court make
reference to Madison's "Memorial and Remonstrance" nor to
Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in which he had
posited "a wall" separating Church and State.

Subsequently, the Board of Education entered an appeal before
the New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals, and the case was argued
before that tribunal on May 21, 1945.

Interestingly, the brief filed by the attorney for the Prosecutor-
Respondent (Arch Everson) paralleled arguments used by the
Scottish Rite's Elmer Rogers. Specifically mentioned was Jefferson's
Act for Establishing Religious Freedom, and the identical passage
from the "Memorial and Remonstrance" which Rogers had cited in a
1935 and 1940 New Age commentary, as well as in his testimony
before the House Education Committee in 1937.®®

A friend-of-the-court brief was filed by the American Civil
Liberties Onion (ACLO) in support of Mr. Everson. The ACLO
attorneys called the Court's attention to an excerpt from the Reynolds
decision relative to Jefferson's "wall of separation" statement.®^

The Court was unimpressed. Nearly five months later it reversed
the New Jersey Supreme Court's decision and ruled that the school
transportation law violated neither the Constitution of New Jersey nor
the Constitution of the Clnited States.®^

A petition for re-argument before the New Jersey Court of Appeals
was denied on November 29, 1945. However, a little more than two
months later, on February 5, 1946, the Chancellor and Presiding
Judge of that Court authorized an appeal to the Supreme Court of the
Clnited States. On May 6, 1946, the latter tribunal issued an order
noting probable jurisdiction.®^

Curiously, the arguments made by Mr. Everson's attorney in his
brief to the Cl.S. Supreme Court did not reiterate the arguments
advanced by his attorney in the lower Court of Errors and Appeals.
Rather, those earlier arguments in the New Jersey court were
advocated on Mr. Everson's behalf before the Cl.S. Supreme Court by
the ACLCl in another friend-of-the-court brief.

That brief listed virtually all the citations against aid to church
schools which had been made years earlier by Elmer Rogers of the
Scottish Rite. Common to the ACLCl brief and Rogers' published
statements were references to the "Memorial and Remonstrance,"
Jefferson's Act for Religious Freedom, Jefferson's reply to the
Danbury Baptists, Davis v. Beason, and Reynolds v. Clnited States.®"^

158

8/ EVERSON; MASONIC
JUSTICE BUILT ON SAND

On February 10, 1947, Justice Hugo L. Black rendered the
majority opinion for a Masonically dominated Court in the Everson
case. It was a farrago of shallowness, gross inaccuracies and wishful
thinking. Both the majority and minority opinions in the case, taken as
a whole, are built on sand, although the minority was the more
rigorous in denying state aid to parochial-school students.

A careful reading of that landmark case clearly shows it is
curiously compatible with the views of Scottish Rite Masonry, and with
the personal philosophy of people like Justice Black--a man who, in
his son's words, "could not whip himself up to a belief in God or the
divinity of Christ, life after death, or Heaven or Hell."

It was a decision crafted for those, again like Black, who "could
not tolerate any sign of encouraging religious faith by state aid."

The majority opinion did properly recognize that "legislation
intended to faciliate the opportunity of children to get a secular
education" can serve a public purpose. The Court also conceded that
reimbursement of parents, in order that their children may "ride in
public buses to and from school rather than run the risk of traffic and
other hazards," is Constitutionally permissible (but not mandated on
the basis of equity.)^

However, the Court perceived a more serious question. That was
whether transporting children to church schools "constitutes support
of a religion by the State." If the New Jersey law is invalid for that
reason, the majority continued, "it is because it violates the First
Amendment's prohibition against the establishment of religion."^

Black's majority opinion emphasized the role of Virginia in
providing leadership to engraft a Bill of Rights on the Constitution. In
that State and elsewhere, he observed, people reached the conviction
that "individual religious liberty could be achieved best under a
government which was stripped of all power to tax, to support, or
otherwise to assist any or all religions, or to interfere with the beliefs
of any religious individuals or group."^

That viewpoint, the Court said, was embodied in Madison's
"Memorial and Remonstrance," and had led to the State of Virginia

159

enacting Jefferson's Bill for Religious Liberty, which forbade the State
to compel "a man to furnish contributions of money for the
propagation of opinions which he disbelieves."'^

Madison and Jefferson, the Court continued, had played leading
roles in "the drafting and adoption" of the religion-clause, which had
the same purpose as the Virginia Bill for Religious Liberty. The
decision also asserted that the Court's majority opinion on the
interpretation of the religion-clause had previously been voiced by
the high bench in Reynolds, Watson, and Beason.^

Continuing, the majority said Madison in the "Memorial" had
eloquently argued "that no person, either believer or non-believer,
should be taxed to support religious institutions of any kind."®

The State, said the Court, "cannot exclude individual Catholics,
Lutherans, Mohammedans, Baptists, Jews, Methodists, Non-believers,
Presbyterians, or the members of any other faith, because of their
faith, or lack of it, from receiving the benefits of public welfare
legislation."^

Concluding, Justice Black said:

"The 'establishment of religion' clause . . .means at least
this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a
church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all
religions, or prefer one religion over another. . . No tax in any
amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious
activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or
whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion . .

.In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of
religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation
between church and State.' Reynolds v. CJnited States supra at
164."

That last statement is pure Black, and pure Masonic. It reads
suspiciously like Scottish Rite Principle No. 5 regarding education
(which was included in the letter Justice Black had sent to his fellow
Mason, Sen. Lister Hill, on April 5, 1945, when the Senator was
running up against the likelihood of Congress approving--as it had for
World War II veterans--legislation which would provide aid to church
schools).

Scottish Rite Principle No. 5 supports:

"5. The entire separation of Church and State, and
opposition to every attempt to appropriate public moneys--

160

federal, state or local--directly or indirectly, for the support of
sectarian or private institutions."®

Although all nine Justices shared a Masonic philosophy (seven
were actual Masons), the minority were outraged by the majority
opinion. The lyrics of the actual ruling--allowing for state
reimbursement for children riding public buses to parochial schools--
did not match the melody of the thought--which embraced the "wall of
separation" interpretation.

in a separate dissenting opinion. Justice Robert H. Jackson, a
33rd Degree Mason said:

" . . .the undertones of the opinion, advocating complete
and uncompromising separation of Church from State, seem
utterly discordant with its conclusion yielding support to their
commingling in educational matters. The case which
irresistibly comes to mind as the most fitting precedent is that
of Julia who, according to Byron's reports, 'whispering "1 will
n'er consent," consented.'

Justice Jackson expressed concern that Catholic schools were
mandated in conscience for Catholics by Canon Law. He said "the
whole historic conflict in temporal policy between the Catholic Church
and non-Catholics comes to a focus in their respective school
policies." Catholic education "is the rock upon which the whole
structure rests, and to render tax aid to its Church school is
indistinguishable to me from rendering the same aid to the Church
itself."^®

Although he failed to pursue the true crux of the school conflict.
Justice Jackson did allude to it by noting that governing authorities
had long ago established a public school system which was
"consistent" with a general Protestantism.^^

However, he immediately contradicted himself in the next
sentence by asserting that the public school was "organized on the
premise that secular education can be isolated from all religious
teaching."

The truth is, prayer and Bible reading were integral to the
"Protestant public school system in the CJnited States until the
Supreme Court's Engel decision in 1962, and its Schempp ruling in
1963--a period when Masons dominated the Court by a six-to-three
ratio.

Actually, once education was mandated by law, all that Catholics,

161

Lutherans, Christian Reformed, Orthodox Jews, and others who
established church schools ever expected from their government was
equality of opportunity to freely exercise their religion. It was a view
they shared with James Madison, who wrote in his "Memorial,"

"A just government. . .will be best supported by protecting
every citizen in the enjoyment of his Religion with the same
equal hand which protects his person and his property; by
neither invading the equal rights of any Sect, nor suffering any
Sect to invade those of another. .

Commenting on the Constitutional rights of those who believe in a
conventional religion oriented to God and Christ, Justice Jackson
asserted that the State "may not spend funds to secure religion
against skepticism."

At the same time, he characterized public welfare benefits for
church-school children as a Constitutionally impermissible "reward
[for] piety," or compensation "for adherence to a creed.

In saying that, the Justice exhibited a peculiar antipathy toward
conventional religion--particularly Christianity and Catholicism--
which has become common to Court members since Everson.

According to the rationale of the Court, citizens who were not
affiliated with a church or religion, "non-believers," skeptics, and
atheists, for example, were free to propagate their a-theist (without
God) values and philosophy in the public schools.

In that connection, six years after the Everson decision. Professor
Wilber K. Katz of the CJniversity of Chicago observed:

"... naturalistic philosophy involves religious assumptions
quite as much as supernaturalistic philosophy. To call
supernaturalism a philosophy and on that basis exclude one
and embrace the other is a form of self-deception."^^

If Justice Jackson's first point regarding the rights of religion and
skepticism is true, then the Constitution has been designed to shield
only skepticism and non-religion, while leaving conventional religion
defenseless.

But such a position is totally contrary to the meaning of the
religion-clause, as evidenced by its genesis and development.
Further, such a viewpoint negates the "privileges and immunities"
clauses of the Fourth and Fourteenth Articles of the Constitution, as
well as the equal protection provision of the latter Article.

The Justice, however, did expose the flashpoint of the perduring

162

school controversy.

The flashpoint is ignited by the conviction, held by a great many
citizens, that their tax money for education is being used to secure
skepticism against conventional religion in public schools. Those
citizens are unable to understand how such a system of injustice can
be perpetrated by decisions of the Supreme Court of the CJnited
States, beginning with Everson.

As for Justice Jackson's second point, public welfare benefits for
church school children are not a reward for piety, nor compensation
for adherence to a creed. Such benefits are a right in equity under the
Constitution when States mandate education for all children between
certain ages. Mr. Jackson's sense of Justice effectively penalizes
citizens for holding beliefs that differ from his own; or, as James
Madison said, "Whose opinions in Religion do not bend to those of the
Legislative [or Judicial?] authority?"^®

Further Preference For Non-Belief

But the assault on belief involved far more than Justice Jackson's
views. The minority opinion in Everson by Justice Rutledge, Joined in
by Justices Burton, Frankfurter and Jackson, was equally militant in
defense of Non-belief--a value system with which the Masons and
Unitarians on the high bench were not at all uncomfortable.

Just as the Scottish Rite's New Age magazine, seven years prior
to the Everson decision, had insisted that Madison's "Memorial and
Remonstrance" and Jefferson's Bill for Religious Freedom "were the
principles and precedents out of which was formed the Bill of Rights,"
so agreed the Court. Indeed, Justice Rutledge included the
"Memorial" as an appendix to his opinion.

The thrust of Rutledge's minority opinion was that citizens who
wish religious instruction mixed with secular education do not have
the same protection of the Constitution as do others who prefer
secular education alone, devoid of any reference to a Supreme Being
and eternal truths.^®

Justice Rutledge said:

"Like St. Paul's freedom, religious liberty with a great price
must be bought. And for those who exercise it most fully, by
insisting upon religious education for their children mixed with
secular, by terms of our Constitution the price is greater than
for others."^®

163

That viewpoint clearly conflicted with the views of Madison, the
man Rutledge relied upon so heavily to buttress his own position on
the religion-clause. The Everson minority placed themselves in the
position of defending their own establishment, a position differing little
from the religious establishment in Virginia which Madison had so
vigorously opposed. In that connection, Madison had said:

"It violates equality by subjecting some to peculiar
burdens; so it violates the same principle, by granting to
others peculiar exemptions."^®

The minority's advocacy of second-class citizenship for people
supporting and attending church schools also constituted a
repudiation of the words "Equal Justice Cinder Law," which are
chiseled in stone above the main entrance of the CJ.S. Supreme Court
Building in Washington, D.C.

But most amazing is the fact that cursory examination of some
key citations noted by the minority to support its position are non¬
existent!

For example. Justice Rutledge, after citing extensively from the
"Memorial and Remonstrance" (often finding very little support for his
position), wrote:

"In view of this history no further proof is needed that the
Amendment forbids any appropriation, large or small, from
public funds to aid or support any and all religious exercises.

But if more were called for, the debates in the First Congress
and this Court's consistent expressions, whenever it has
touched on the matter directly, supply it."

He then referred to Congressional debates on the religion-clause
and found only "sparse discussion, reflecting the fact that the
essential issues had been settled."

The minority opinion then referred to "the only enlightening
reference," which "shows concern, not to preserve any power to use
public funds in aid of religion, but to prevent the Amendment from
outlawing private gifts inadvertently ..."

That statement is followed by a footnote which references a
colloquy between Madison and Representative Huntington during
debate on the religion-clause in the First Congress. At that time,
Madison proposed that "No religion shall be established by law ..."

Justice Rutledge rightly noted that Huntington objected because
he feared the words might be "extremely hurtful to the cause of

164

religion." However, the minority opinion curiously failed to quote
Huntington's remarks which immediately follow those quoted by
Rutledge. And, from Justice Rutledge's viewpoint, that is
understandable.

Huntington continued by saying he "hoped the amendment
[proposed by Madison] would . . . not . . . patronize those who
professed no religion at all."^^

Rutledge then said Madison suggested the word "national" be
placed before "religion." That word change, Rutledge declared, would
"not only again [disclaim] intent to bring about the result Huntington
feared but also [show] unmistakably that 'establishment' meant public
'support' of religion in the financial sense. 1 Annals of Congress 731."
22

Once again. Justice Rutledge was more than misleading, he was
totally inaccurate, in explaining his proposed addition of the word
"national" before the word "religion," Madison--

"... feared one sect might obtain pre-eminence, or two
combine together, and established a religion to which they
would compel others to conform ... if the word national was
introduced, it would point the amendment directly to the
object it was intended to prevent."^^

Nowhere in that response by Madison is it shown--as the minority
opinion asserts--"unmistakably that 'establishment' meant public
'support' of religion in the financial sense."

More importantly. Justice Rutledge failed to note a crucial aspect
of that proposal by Madison. As the Annals record: he "withdrew his
motion.

Pressing on, and using questionable facts. Justice Rutledge said
Reuben Quick Bear v. Leupp, 210 G.S. 50 (1907) is the Supreme
Court's "decision most closely touching the question" of appropriation
of public funds to aid or support any and all religious exercises, in
that case. Justice Rutledge said, "it was stated also that such a use of
public moneys would violate both the First Amendment and the
specific statutory declaration involved . .

in reality, there is no mention of the First Amendment in Quick
Bear in the context used by Rutledge.

The case concerned the use by Sioux Indians of their own money
from a "Treaty Fund" to educate Sioux children under contract with
the Bureau of Catholic Indian Missions.

The Court held that Indians may use their own money to educate

165

their children "in the schools of their own choice because the
Government is necessarily undenominational, as it cannot make any
law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof."^®

Further, while the Court recognized the fact that Congress had
terminated appropriations for education of Indians in sectarian
schools in 1895, the high bench also observed that subsequent public
appropriations for Indian education in such schools was entirely
possible.

Addressing that specific issue, the Court, in Quick Bear, said: " . .
•the effect of the legislation was to make subsequent appropriations
for education mean that sectarian schools were excluded in sharing in
them, unless otherwise provided." (Emphasis added).

The Court never hinted that future funding of Indian children in
sectarian schools would violate the First Amendment. Rather, it
recognized that Congress might at some future time "otherwise
provide" appropriations for Indian education in sectarian schools.
Once again, the minority opinion was gravely misleading.

Justice Rutledge also argued that providing State funds for church
schools would lead to national strife, as different groups vied for
public funds. He said:

"Public money devoted to payment of religious costs,
educational or other, brings the quest for more. It brings too
the struggle of sect against sect for the larger share or for any.
Here one by numbers alone will benefit most, there another.

That is precisely the history of societies which have had an
established religion and dissident groups . . .

"Exactly such conflicts have centered of late around
providing transportation to religious schools from public funds
m28

To buttress the allegation that public appropriations for church
schools would bring "the struggle of sect against sect," Rutledge cited
sections 8 of 11 of Madison's "Memorial and Remonstrance."
However, those paragraphs contradict the very point Rutledge was
attempting to establish.

Both citations express opposition to a single Church
establishment, and call for equality among the various religious sects.
A single establishment, simply by definition, would not tolerate a
variety of "sects," a plurality of church schools. There would be only
one "sect," and one church school.

166

Sec. 8 of Madison's "Memorial" says:

"A just government. . .will be best supported by protecting
every citizen in the enjoyment of his Religion with the same
EQCJAL hand which protects his person and his property: by
neither invading the EQUAL rights of any Sect, nor suffering
any Sect to invade those of another." (Emphasis added).
[Everson, p. 68].

And Sec. 11 of the "Memorial" expresses total opposition to the
secular arm intruding into religious affairs by prohibiting public
expression of religious opinion that is contrary to the State-imposed
value system. Madison called for the free exercise of religion for all
sects. He opposed the very monolithic public school system with its
"group think" which Rutledge and his colleagues mandated.

Madison said:

" . . .Torrents of blood have been spilt in the old world, by
vain attempts of the secular arm to extinguish religious
discord, by proscribing all difference in Religious opinions.
Time has at length revealed the true remedy. Every relaxation
of narrow and rigorous policy . . . has been found to assuage
the disease. [America] has exhibited proofs, that EQUAL and
compleat liberty, if it does not wholly eradicate it, sufficiently
destroys its malignant influence on the health and prosperity
of the State . . ." (Emphasis added). [Everson, p. 68].

Actually, the statement by the minority, while not accurately
reflecting the views of Madison, does echo the views of Justice Black,
and Elmer Rogers of the Scottish Rite.

In testimony delivered before the Senate Education and Labor
Committee--shortly after Justice Black had initiated correspondence
with Senator Hill and with the high Masonic official--the latter
expressed opposition to Congress providing equitable educational
benefits for students in both public and church schools. He said:

" . . .each group would contend for the most it could get
and thus give rise to much wrangling.

"Moreover, the fight between the two kinds of nonpublic
schools, sectarian and nonsectarian, would be always tense,
to say nothing of a like feeling that would arise as between the
various religious denominations for their respective shares.

All of this will throw religion and education into State and

167

National politics with that acrimony and vindictive jealousy
that always characterizes such issues."^®

And those views of Rogers were strikingly similar to sentiments
expressed by Justice Black when he was commenting on his
membership in the Ku Klux Klan before a nationwide radio audience
in 1937. At that time Black had said:

" . . .any program, even if directed by good intentions,
which tends to breed or revive religious discord or
antagonism can and may spread with such rapidity as to
imperil this vital Constitutional protection of one of the most
sacred human rights . . .

"[It will project] religious beliefs into a position of prime
importance in political campaigns and . . . reinject our social
and business life with the passion of religious bigotry.

"It will bring the political religionist back into undeserved
and perilous influence in affairs of government. .

The "Religion" Of The Religion Clause

A central theme of both the majority and minority in Everson
focuses on the rights of non-believers under the religion-clause; yet
the basic documents used by the Court to support its position--
Madison's "Memorial" and Jefferson's Bill for Religious Freedom--
never mention "non-believers." That is not to say that Christian
citizens, whose church affiliations, values and beliefs have
overwhelmingly dominated this nation throughout its entire history,
have not accorded rights to non-believers under the Constitution.
Manifestly, they have.

However, to put the First Amendment in perspective, it is essential
to understand to what precisely the word religion in the Amendment
refers.

That meaning is readily discernible by reviewing the wording of
the proposals on the subject submitted by the States immediately
prior to the time the religion-clause was drafted. The applicable State
proposals define religion exactly as it is defined by Madison in his
"Memorial," and by Jefferson in his Bill for Religious Freedom in
Virginia.

Those sources stipulate that religion is the "duty which we owe to
our Creator and the manner of discharging it."^^

168

That precise definition was recognized and accepted by the
Supreme Court in Reynolds, Season and Macintosh, in 1878, 1890,
and 1931, respectively--many years prior to the Everson decision.

Indeed, after reading 74 pages of a judicial decision regarding the
religion-clause, it seems odd that the Court avoided any mention of
the historically acceptable definition of religion.

It is odd, because the Everson Court repeatedly referred to
Madison's "Memorial," Jefferson's Bill, and, to a lesser extent,
Reynolds and Season. (Interestingly enough, the Everson Court never
referred to Macintosh.)

Clearly, that historic definition excludes "non-believers" and
atheists, a view reinforced by Congressional debate when the clause
was being drafted, and by earlier Supreme Court rulings and
Constitutional commentary.^^

Cinder that definition, the religion-clause places its protective
mantle over those who recognize a Supreme Being, and who also
believe they have a duty toward that Being.

But Madison was even more emphatic about the need for the State
to recognize and protect that sacred relationship between man and
God. In the first section of his "Memorial" he said:

"Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil
Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor
of the Clniverse: and . . .every man who becomes a member
of any particular Civil Society [must] do it with a saving of his
allegiance to the Clniversal Sovereign.

That view illuminates the unanswered point in the debate on the
issue of government involvement in education. Once the State
mandates education for children between certain ages, it is
prohibited--by the judicially accepted concept of the term "religion"
in the religion-clause--from forcing children to accept education in
schools where the teaching is not compatible with their religious
beliefs; and, indeed, where the children may be ridiculed for their
conscientious understanding that there is a God, and a "duty" which
must be discharged toward Him, even in the classroom. Madison
recognized that truth when he observed that a person's first allegiance
is to "the Clniversal Sovereign." It is an allegiance, he insisted, which
takes precedence over any man's membership in civil society.

To Justice Jackson, any State effort to equitably accommodate
youthful citizens by invoking that judicially accepted meaning of
religion would be an "award for piety," or "compensation for

169

adherence to a creed."

At the same time, Justice Rutledge, who was quite selective in his
citations from Madison's "Memorial," never conceded that children
who insist on "a saving . . .allegiance to the CJniversal Sovereign"
have any Constitutional right to discharge their duty to Him in the
classroom. As far as Justice Rutledge was concerned, any child who
had such ideas must be willing, under the Constitution, to pay a price
"greater than for others" who do not concede the meaning of religion
defined by Madison and Jefferson--a meaning accepted as the
Constitutional definition of religion by three prior Supreme Court
decisions.

Those viewpoints by the Court in Everson (and its progeny)
effectively mandate a philosophy in public school classrooms that is
completely compatible only with the views of non-believers--a group
not covered by the Constitutional definition of "religion." That
definition of "religion" applicable to the religion-clause had been
accepted from the time the clause was written, and was confirmed
several times by the Court prior to its dominance by members of the
Masonic Fraternity.

The Everson decision clearly was a novel departure from the
entire history of the origin and development of the religion-clause. As
post 1947 decisions involving the clause demonstrated, Everson
marked a turning point in the public perception of the role of religion
in public life.

That historic 1947 decision--based largely on a collection of
arguments first advanced by spokesmen for Scottish Rite
Freemasonry-- began a trend in jurisprudence which elevated the
Masonic religion of Kabbalistic Gnosticism to a preeminent position in
a nation that historically is rooted in Christianity.

Reaction to Everson

The record detailed above provides sufficient documentation to
support the view that the Court essentially enunciated a philosophy
gestated in the Lodge.

That perception is reinforced by a letter Justice Black received
from Professor Peter Masten Dunne of the Clniversity of San
Francisco, protesting the Everson rationale. Professor Dunne wrote:

"The American people have always aided religion in many
different ways and they have aided all religions. For your
enlightenment on what is good Americanism, read the Annals

170

of the Congress of the CJnited States, volume one, where the
debate on the wording of the First Amendment is given, it
becomes evident from a study of this record that the framers
of the Amendment wanted religion to be aided; they feared the
very interpretation which you have so illogically given.

in the margin of the letter, opposite the words "volume one," and
extending down the page, appears a hand-written note: "Get Vol. 1 and
let's see what was said."^®

The note indicates that the Annals of Congress, which records the
debate on the religion-clause, had not been seen by Justice Black.

The Court's decision was attacked by the Council of Bishops of
the Methodist Church as a "departure" from the American principles
of separation of Church and State.

On May 9, 1947, The New York Times reported that the Southern
Baptist Convention had warned Baptist institutions against accepting
Government grants for construction or equipment because such aid
weakens separation of Church and State.

Dr. J. M. Dawson, executive secretary of the Joint Conference
Committee of American Baptists, deplored a "drift toward the union of
Church and State." Baptists, he said, "protest Federal or state
appropriation of tax funds for sectarian purposes."^®

in connection with the published position of the Baptists, it is
worthy of note that Justice Black received another letter, this one
from Mr. C. E. Crossland of Lakeland, Florida, who thanked the
Justice for his majority opinion in the Everson case.

Mr. Crossland enclosed pages 429 and 485 of the minutes of
meetings of the Lakeland City Commissioners which showed the city
gave $25,000 in public funds for a Baptist children's home, and also
gave 15 city lots to the Florida Baptist Institute where "Baptist
ministers could be instructed." Mr. Crossland said he had nine such
files, seven of which related to Baptists receiving government
funds.®®

Also, Sen. George Aiken, commenting on the issue of aid to
religious schools, said it "has been met over and over again with such
legislation as the G.l. Bill of Rights, and it can be met again."

He added: "The old argument of separation of church and state
falls down, when under the G.l. Bill of Rights, the Clnited States is
paying today to educate priests, Protestant ministers and Rabbis.""'^®

McCollum Reinforces Everson Philosophy

171

Just over one year after its controversial Everson decision, the
Court decided McCollum, a case involving released time for religious
instruction in public schools. Again, it was a situation Scottish Rite
Masonry had protested for a long time.

Reaffirming Everson philosophy. Justice Black, speaking for the
majority, struck down an Illinois State law which permitted released
time. The rationale again was predicated on Jefferson's "wall . .
.which must be kept high and impregnable.""^^

Justice Black repeated his view that "Neither a state nor the
Federal Government can set up a church. Neither . . .aid one religion,
aid all religions . . .No tax in any amount . . .can support religious
activities or institutions . .

Both McCollum and Everson drew strong opposition from the
Catholic Bishops of the CJnited States. At their annual meeting in
1948, the prelates said secularism is "the most deadly menace to our
Christian and American way of living."

The bishops characterized the Court's interpretation of the
religion-clause as "novel," and said Jefferson's "wall" was merely a
metaphor. Continuing, the Catholic churchmen said it would be an
"utter distortion of history and law" to establish a national policy of
"indifference to religion.

Everson's Enduring Impact

The "wall" erected by the Everson decision has been left standing
by the Court in case after case, beginning with McCollum and
continuing into the 1980s. However, a modest counterattack against
that Judicial attachment to a vagrant phrase became evident within
the judicial system, beginning in the 1970s.

In addition to outlawing released time, the Court over the years
has: established secular humanism and other non-theistic beliefs as
"religion"prohibited vocal prayer, devotional Bible reading, and
recitation of the Lord's Prayer in public schools;"^® banned aid for
sectarian purposes to colleges where the curriculum was permeated
with religious teaching and exercises, and at which clerics dominated
the boards of trusteesproscribed public funding of salaries for
teachers at parochial schools, as well as State-funded instructional
materials in such schools;"^® prohibited public funding for
maintenance and repair grants at parochial schools, while also
denying tuition reimbursement and tuition tax deductions for

172

education at such schools."^®

Further, the Court prohibited State funding for instructional
materials and equipment, counseling, testing services, together with
speech and hearing therapy in church schools.^® Also, the Court
ruled unconstitutional a Kentucky statute which authorized posting the
Ten Commandments (purchased with private contributions) on the
walls of public school classrooms in the State.

Michigan and New York were prohibited from providing
enrichment classes in mathematics, art, and music taught by public
school teachers to nonpublic school students in classrooms leased
from church schools;^^ and an Alabama statute authorizing a one-
minute period of silence in public schools for meditation or prayer
was declared to violate the religion-clause of the First Amendment.^^

Moreover, the curious concern about religious strife endemic to
equitable state funding of church schools--a perception which
reflected the thinking of Justice Black when he defended his Ku Klux
Klan membership in a nationwide broadcast in 1937, and a viewpoint
voiced later by the Scottish Rite's Elmer Rogers in Congressional
testimony, and by Justice Rutledge in his minority Everson opinion--
became judicial boilerplate in numerous Supreme Court religion-
clause decisions.

Justice Frankfurter's concurring opinion in McCollum (Joined by
Justices Jackson, Rutledge and Burton) recalled "fierce sectarian
opposition to the barring of tax funds to church schools," and credited
Horace Mann with saving the common school "from being rent by
denominational conflict."

The concurring opinion also cited a passage from the mid-19th-
Century Girard decision, but quoted it out of context to suggest there
had been a consensus in the 1840s opposing religious instruction in
public schools. It was a totally erroneous and misleading statement
by Justice Frankfurter.^''^

Justice Arthur Goldberg included a reference to the potential for
national discord because of religious beliefs in his opinion in the
Schempp-Murray decision. And the national hazard associated with
religious beliefs again loomed up in Justice M. Harlan's opinion in the
Allen case.^^

In 1969, Professor Paul Fruend said, "Political division on religious
lines is one of the principal evils that the first amendment sought to
forestall."^®

Justice Harlan emphasized the identical theme the following year
in the Walz case, as did Chief Justice Burger in the 1971 Lemon
decision. And the threat of national violence associated with funding

173

of church schools was echoed once more by Justice Lewis Powell in
his majority opinion in Nyquist two years later, as it was by Justices
Stewart, Brennan, Douglas and Marshall in their Joint opinion in the
Meek case of 1975.^^

That train of conjecture by the highest tribunal in the land about an
unfounded potential for national discord and strife was strange indeed,
particularly since only conventional religion was indicted as the
source for such fears. However, in the Girard case, the Court referred
to public policies "connected with religious polity, in a country
composed of such a variety of religous sects as our country." it was
then declared that the Court had no right to inject itself into potential
disputes on the issue unless an actual case was before it.

Rather than conjecture about potentialities, the Court said:

"We disclaim any right to enter upon such examinations,
beyond what the state constitutions, and laws, and decisions
necessarily bring before us."^®

The post-Everson Court's train of conjecture is rather bizarre
because (a) there is no history to support such conjecture since the
demise of the Ku Klux Klan; and (b) the Court never evidenced such
fears about strife and conflict precipitated by legislation and Court
decisions that provided open housing, school busing, and other civil
rights laws which in modern times did, in fact, frequently ignite
serious rioting and bloodshed across the nation.

How Religion-clause Cases Came To Court

Some who were adults prior to 1947 have expressed wonderment
at the sudden explosion of religion-clause cases taken up by the
Supreme Court following the Everson decision.

Based upon the record, it is obvious that many, if not all of the
religion-clause cases, beginning with Everson, were brought to the
Supreme Court by Freemasonry and its allies.

For example, the preceding pages established that Scottish Rite
Masonry had expressed its opposition to: public busing of children to
parochial schools; released time religious education in public
schools; every form of religious expression in those schools; as well
as supporting "the entire separation of Church and State, and
opposition to every attempt to appropriate public moneys--federal,
state or local--directly or indirectly, for the support of sectarian or

174

private institutions."

It also has been demonstrated that all of those Masonic concerns
were largely resolved by the Court to the satisfaction of the Craft when
that tribunal was dominated by Masons. Moreover, the opinions by the
Justices in those cases paralleled a unique series of arguments that
had been first advanced by a representative of the Supreme Council
of Scottish Rite Masonry.

The next question is: how did it happen?

One Masonic author disclosed in 1959 that Masonry "provided the
major obstacle" to the growth of religious-oriented education in
America.

Two months later, another member of the Craft commented: "The
action of Judges who were Masons in defending the liberties of the
people from the encroachment of a power-hungry despot, oligarchy,
bureaucracy [i.e., the Catholic Church] . . .has been uniformly
commendable.

In 1966, the Grand Commander of the Scottish Rite of the Southern
Jurisdiction explained how Masonic activity in religion-clause cases
is initiated. He said:

"The first thing to do is to find taxpayers who will allow

their names to be used to take the case to court."®®

The Grand Commander's remarks were prompted by the Craft's
success in pursuing a case in Maryland which ultimately resulted in
denial of public funds for three church colleges: Western Maryland, a
Methodist institution; and Notre Dame and St. Joseph's, both of
Maryland and both Catholic (St. Joseph's subsequently closed its
doors).®^

Continuing, the Grand Commander said the motivating force in the
Maryland case was the Horace Mann League, aided by Protestants
and Other Americans Clnited for Separation of Church and State
(POACl), and the Scottish Rite Supreme Council itself.®^

Both POACl (presently known as Americans Clnited or ACl) and the
Horace Mann League are Masonically supported and influenced
organizations.®^

Additional victories by the Craft occurred when former California
Governor Earl Warren, a 33rd Degree Mason, became Chief Justice in
1953.

Two years after Brother Warren assumed his exalted position on
the high bench. Brother Henry C. Clausen of California, 33rd Degree

175

Mason (who later became Sovereign Grand Commander of the
Scottish Rite), reminded the Fraternity of Brother Warren's philosophy
toward education. He recalled a 1936 annual message made to the
Brethren by then Grand Master Warren of the Grand Lodge of
California. At that time, Earl Warren had said:

" . . .the education of our youth . . .can best be done,
indeed it can only be done, by a system of free public
education, it is for this reason that the Grand Lodge of
California, ever striving as it does to replace darkness with
light, is so vitally interested in the public schools of our state .

"By destroying prejudice and planting reason in its place it
prepares the foundation of a liberty-loving people for free
government. .

"Darkness" and "Light" are old Masonic code words for the beliefs
of conventional religious groups, particularly teachings of the Roman
Catholic Church, as opposed to the beliefs of Freemasonry and
Naturalism. The "prejudice" to be destroyed is, again. Catholic and
other conventional faith and belief.

Grand Commander Clausen was not lax in using the courts to ban
State aid for religious education, in 1968, he filed a brief before the
Supreme Court on behalf of the appellants in Flast v. Cohen.

Florence Flast, chairperson of the New York State PEARL (a
militant anti-church-school coalition) argued that federal funds had
been expended unconstitutionally for sectarian schools under the
federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Chief Justice
Warren ruled that the coalition had "standing" to bring the suit to the
Court.®®

The Chief Justice, according to Masonic dogma, was subordinate,
in Masonic activities, to the Sovereign Grand Commander of Scottish
Rite Freemasonry. Prohibiting aid to religious education certainly is a
well-documented Masonic activity.

The New Age viewed Chief Justice Warren's ruling as "a signal
victory" for the doctrine of separation of Church and State. ®^

Other Masonic interests that submitted briefs supporting Flast and
PEARL were POACJ and the late Senator Sam Ervin (D., NC), a 33rd
Degree Mason.®®

Further evidence of Scottish Rite involvement in bringing cases
before the Supreme Court was set forth in a report by the Supreme
Council's Committee on Education and Americanism. The report said

176

that "almost without exception, in most [efforts to oppose aid to
church schools] you will find strong activity on the part of individual
Scottish Rite Masons.

The Committee urged Masons: (1) to join organizations such as
Americans CJnited, and Americans for Public Schools in order to
oppose aid to parochial schools; (2) to educate each Master Mason on
the importance of the issue; (3) to elect legislators opposed to aid to
such schools; (4) to lead men and women to repulse efforts to obtain
aid for religiously affiliated schools; (5) to encourage formation of
lawyers' committees to monitor legislation and recommend legal
steps to "strike down" unconstitutional laws; and (6) to distribute
Masonic propaganda "through public and private schools and
libraries. "^0

in 1976, the same Supreme Council Committee observed that
courts alone cannot deny subsidies to church schools, nor can they
initiate action on their own. The courts, said the panel report, "must
wait for others to bring cases before them," a situation which "requires
people and money."

At that point, the report said: "it can be done; it has been done."

Examples were cited, including the Grand Commander's efforts to
challenge tax credits for education in California in 1976, as well as
litigation in six other States, including the Horace Mann case in
Maryland.

Not cited was Grand Commander Clausen's brief filed in the 1971
Lemon case, in which he argued: "The American [Catholic] Church
officials are merely executing and voicing those directives from
Rome. Control is in Rome, regardless of the American hierarchy, on
subjects such as birth control, dogma or education.

After reviewing arguments, the Court, in its Lemon decision,
apparently accepted the substance of the Grand Commander's
argument, it noted that Catholic schools constituted "an integral part
of the religious mission of the Catholic Church," and added:

"We cannot ignore the dangers that a teacher under religious
control and discipline poses to the separation of the religious from the
purely secular aspects of pre-college education. The conflict of
functions inheres in the situation.

Commenting on the Court's ruling in that case, the Grand
Commander saw it as "a tremendous vindication for the often-
expressed views of the Supreme Council of the Scottish Rite . .

177

Secularizing Religious Colleges

Of particular interest is the Court's decision in the Horace Mann
League case which denied State funding to church-related colleges,
because it shows how a single Court ruling effectively emasculated
the religious mission, not only of the church-related colleges involved
in the case, but of many others across the nation.

in that 1966 case, the Maryland Court of Appeals (the State's
"Supreme" Court) found that the stated purposes of Notre Dame
College of Maryland "are deeply and intensely religious."

The theory of Catholic education, the court observed, utilizes
prayer. Holy Mass, and the Sacraments, as the "unifying forces."
Moreover, the Maryland tribunal found that students' lives are "lived in
a Catholic atmosphere which assumes that earthly life is to be lived .
. . in terms of a preparation for the future life with God." To that end, it
was determined that the college "harmonizes" its entire program "with
the philosophy and theology of the Catholic Church.

The Court also noted that the governing board of the college was
controlled by a Catholic religious order whose members are
completely committed to Catholic discipline and educational
philosophy. Further, those who administer the college were found to
be comprised of people who were almost entirely priests or Religious;
and the faculty was chosen on the basis of commitment to the Roman
Catholic objectives and ideals of the college, which are
overwhelmingly Catholic. Additionally, "more than 97 percent of the
whole student body is Catholic."^®

Finally, it was noted that St. Joseph's College had purposes which
"seem to be even more strongly religious than Notre Dame . .

Within one year of that decision (which was upheld by the G.S.
Supreme Court, 387 CJ.S. 97), a number of Catholic colleges and
universities, notably the CJniversity of Notre Dame at South Bend,
Indiana, replaced almost all of the priests, brothers and nuns on their
Boards of Directors with lay personnel. The Catholic ambience of
those educational institutions also was toned down considerably.

Ten years later, the Masonically influenced Horace Mann League
brought to the Supreme Court a related case, involving most of the
same schools.

The Court now found that the ostensibly Catholic colleges of Notre
Dame of Maryland, St. Joseph's, Mount St. Mary's, and Loyola of
Baltimore were not "pervasively sectarian." Despite "formal affiliation
with the Roman Catholic Church," they are "characterized by a high
degree of institutional autonomy." None of the four "Catholic"

178

institutions "receives funds from, or makes reports to the Catholic
Church"; and "no instance of entry of Church considerations into
college decisions was shown.

The Court further found that attendance at religious exercises was
not required, and "encouragement of spiritual development is only
'one secondary objective' of the college." Further, "religious
indoctrination is not a substantial purpose or activity of any of these
defendants," and there is "no 'actual college policy' of encouraging
the practice" of prayer.^® State funding was now permitted.

Interestingly enough, in his dissenting opinion. Justice John Paul
Stevens noted "the pernicious tendency of a state subsidy to tempt
religious schools to compromise their religious mission without
wholly abandoning it."®®

By the 1980s, the common practice of Catholic colleges and
universities muting or abandoning Catholic teaching and discipline in
the service of Mammon had blossomed into a lively dispute between
the so-called American Catholic Church and the Holy See.

Melding The Craft And The Court--A Summary

Freemasonry, throughout its entire history, has relentlessly fought
the religious beliefs of Christianity, and with equal tenacity opposed
the use of public funds for Christian religious education.

In the United States, the Craft historically had been enormously
successful at the State level in thwarting efforts to provide equity in
distribution of funds for religious schools serving a public purpose. At
the national level, too, the Fraternity had some success, even though
the federal government was only minimally involved in education.
But by the 1930s, the national government began to be increasingly
involved in assisting church-related institutions.

From a Masonic point of view, that situation became even more
ominous in 1944, when Congress approved the "G.I. Bill of Rights,"
and thereby, without a recorded dissenting vote, authorized World War
II veterans, at government expense, to attend the school of their
choice, secular or religious.

The "G.I. Bill," as Sen. Aiken noted, resulted in the federal
government "paying . . .to educate priests, Protestant ministers and
Rabbis."

Further, in the immediate post-war period. Congress was moving
actively toward providing equitable assistance for students in public
and church-related elementary and secondary schools.

179

At no time during discussions of measures involving aid to church
schools, including the G.I. Bill of Rights and other legislation debated
in Congressional Committees prior to Everson, did any of the
Congressmen or Senators--most of whom were lawyers--suggest that
such legislation violated the Constitution, the fundamental law of the
land which they had solemnly sworn to uphold and defend.

The entire legal history of federal support for church institutions
performing public services demonstrated that such government
accommodations were clearly Constitutional, and indeed, had been
upheld repeatedly by the Supreme Court.

With that background, it was evident that any change in the
situation would have to be effected by the Supreme Court, despite
substantial Court precedents upholding federal laws which
accommodated, on an equitable basis, religious institutions
performing public functions.

Meanwhile, a little-noticed propaganda campaign was being
advanced by members of the Masonic Fraternity. That effort insisted:
law "is largely in the interpretation and not in the text" and that the
Constitution and its amendments "are what the judges say they are."

By 1941, an ardent Freemason President had succeeded in having
members of the Craft dominate the Court. At least one member of that
body. Justice Hugo L. Black, is known to have been militantly anti-
Catholic, as evidenced by his membership in the Ku Klux Klan, his
votes in Congress, and his own son's testimony that he "suspected the
Catholic Church" and "could not tolerate any sign of encouraging
religious faith by state aid."

Within days after legislation had been introduced in Congress to
provide equitable aid for both public schools and nonpublic schools.
Justice Black wrote a letter to Senator Lister Hill, a fellow Alabamian,
a Brother Mason, and the principal sponsor of legislation which would
aid public schools only. Justice Black called the Senator's attention to
a list of five Masonic principles concerned with education favored by
the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry.

Principle No. 1 advocates the public school "for all of the children
of all of the people." Principle No. 5 calls for "The entire separation of
Church and State, and opposition to every attempt to appropriate
public moneys . . .directly or indirectly, for the support of sectarian or
private institutions."

The Justice urged Sen. Hill to get in touch with officials of the
Scottish Rite for the purpose of having them support the Senator's
legislation, a measure which would assist public schools only. Indeed,
the Justice himself contacted Masonic officials to inquire of the
Fraternity's position on aid to public schools.

180

The legislation foundered. However, within two years of Justice
Black's letter to Senator Lister Hill, the man who succeeded him in
the Senate, the Masonically dominated Court made it absolutely
certain that Congress would be unable to include church schools in
educational funding legislation.

The high bench declared it unconstitutional to provide public
funds to directly assist or encourage religious education.

And the Justices based their decision--not on the true meaning of
the religion-clause of the First Amendment--but on the meaning of
Jefferson's Bill for Religious Freedom applicable only to the State of
Virginia.®^

That is the record of Masonic justice. And it is built on sand.
Statutory law and the American Bar Association's "Canons of
Judicial Ethics" require that judges be completely impartial in their
decisions, and that there should be no suspicion that their verdicts are
tainted with bias.

The Supreme Court put it well in 1954 when it ruled:

"A fair trial in a fair tribunal is a basic requirement of due
process. Fairness of course requires an absence of actual
bias in the trial of cases. But our system of law has always
endeavored to prevent even the probability of unfairness. To
this end no man can be a judge in his own case and no man is
permitted to try cases where he has an interest in the
outcome . . . .But to perform its high function in the best way
'justice must satisfy the appearance of justice.' Offutt v.
United States, 348 CJ.S. 11, 14."

That majority opinion was written by Justice Hugo L. Black.

181

9/ Warring On The Church--II

Masonry's cosmic battle plan always has massed its primary
attack against the Roman Catholic Church, while subordinating
general Christian beliefs as secondary targets of opportunity.

As an integral part of this war between the religion of Masonry and
the religion of Christianity, the Craft has consistently endeavored to
lure practicing Catholics and other Christians onto its membership
rolls in order to subvert the Church.

A New Age article explained the irreconcilability between the
religion of the Church and the religion of the Craft, as follows:

"In each system, the controlling ideal has to do with the
ultimate destiny, the final goal, of humanity; and in each
system the urge is strong to bring every power and resource
to bear in an effort to realize that ideal ..."

The article went on to say Masonry rejects the Kingdom of
Heaven as an other-world kingdom, but believes the Kingdom of God
"is to be established among men by the evolution and development of
man himself . . . ."^

The Catholic Population Threat

During the years immediately following World War II, the Craft
became deeply worried about the explosive growth of the Catholic
Church in the CJnited States. And understandably so. Table 1 shows
the Catholic population of this country doubled during the 20-year
period 1940-1960, soaring from 20.4 million adherents to 40.8 million.
Moreover, between 1955-1960, fifty-six percent of the total population
growth in the entire nation was in the Catholic sector. Overall, during
the two-decade period from approximately the time of Cl.S.
involvement in World War II until 1960, Catholics accounted for 42.5
percent of the national population growth.

Table 1

182

GROWTH OF U.S. CATHOLIC POPULATION IN RELATION TO
TOTAL NATIONAL POPULATION INCREASE, 1940

183

U S. Ptop. U S. Cath. U.S. CaUi. Percent (%) Cath. Growth As

U.S. Pbp. Increase Percent (*) U.S. Pop. R)p. Growth U.S. Cath. Percent (%) U.S.
(000) (OOO) Pop. Increase_(000)_(000) Pbp. Growth Rrp. Increase (Cols. 6:3)

ppoppppp

vor»QOm«/^ppr4

§8 I 8 § 8

^ ob —

S 8

8

I ior^obobr*^»<i»n«o

I

8

8

184

*Figures rounded to nearest hundred.

CJ.S. population figures are from the Statistical Abstract of the United States,
1982-83, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1982, Table 7, p. 9.

U.S. Catholic population figures are from The "World Almanac, 1941-1981.
During that period the Almanac was published 1941 through 1951 by the New
York world Telegram; subsequently it was published by the New York World
Telegram and Sun. Since 1968 it has been published by Newspaper Enterprise
Association, New York.

See also Historical Statistics Colonial Times To 1957, Part 1, Department of
Commerce, Bureau of Census, Washington, D.C., 1960, Series H 538-543,
"Membership of Selected Religious Bodies: 1790 to 1957," p. 228-229. Catholic
statistics in that Series go back only as far as 1891, at which time Catholics
numbered 8,277,000. However, that religious body is not known to have been
larger than that estimate during the preceding years.

That eye-catching expansion of Catholics in a nation that had long
been Protestant and secularist was even more impressive from a
historical standpoint. It took 427 years--from the time Ponce de Leon
first set his foot on the coast of Florida, until 1940--for Catholics to
number 21 million people. And then, in less than one generation, that
number of Catholics had doubled.

Moreover, the vast majority of adherents to that religion were
concentrated in 19 States with 283 electoral votes. Their percentages
of the total population of those States ranged from 64 in Rhode Island
to 21 in California.^

Clearly, if such a trend continued. Catholics would become a
majority. Even if it did not continue, their political clout would be
enormous.

But the surge of Catholics in the population did not maintain, as
Table 1 shows. One reason for this tapering off was a decline of
immigrants from Catholic countries, and action by Congress to
severely cut back on the number of immigrants from Europe. But the
more important reason was acceptance of artificial birth control by a
majority of Catholics.

Nevertheless, the strong Catholic growth worried Scottish Rite
Freemasonry.

In 1945, the Grand Commander urged the Pope to lift the ban on
the Church's ages-old condemnation of the Masonic Fraternity.^

In 1950, a Knight Templar was telling New Age readers that
Catholicism, not Communism nor Socialism, was the real worry,
because Catholics were winning elections.''^

A 1952 New Age editorial complained that a bill pending in

185

Congress would "open floodgates" for some 300,000 refugees--a
"preponderance" of whom "are Roman Catholics."^

The Scottish Rite leadership evoked the old specter about the
Church, its parochial schools, fraternal and veterans' organizations
being "based on a difference in sectarian faith and teachings [and
being] . . .creative of a grave disunity among our people."®

it was another effort to evoke the same alleged explosive threat to
national unity inherent in the free exercise of beliefs held by Catholics
and other committed Christians.

That specter had loomed first in Justice Black's 1937 national
radio broadcast as he railed against those who had made an issue of
his Klan membership. The same alarm was sounded by Scottish Rite
Masonry's Elmer Rogers, and, repeatedly, by the Supreme Court.

Always, according to those alarmists, the hovering threat of
national discord and potential violence is inherent in any government
effort to equitably accommodate Catholics and other committed
Christians to freely exercise their religious beliefs in a State-
mandated education system. Curiously, the Court never has found the
advancement of non-theistic beliefs a cause for alarm and potential
revolution and violence.

Pursuing the issue of religious discord, the New Age reported, in
1954, that the National Council of Churches was profoundly
concerned about the "growing factor of Catholic power in our national
life," and that the Catholic hierarchy had become "more aggressive in
the political arena, especially in the fields of medicine, education and
foreign policy . . ." The hierarchy, it was claimed, "is on the march as
never before in more than 50 years.

it was also said the Catholic Church insists upon pressing for a
policy of "out-breeding the 'non-Catholic world,' " and thus attempts
to control democracies.®

One Masonic author said the Catholic population had grown from a
missionary territory in 1910 to 31 million adherents in 1958. He
called for a "resistance movement" to prevent imposition of Catholic
Church policies "upon our schools, hospitals, government and family
organizations."^

Roman Catholic values, the author asserted, are "in direct
opposition to the laws of our country" with regard to "official religion,
divorce, marriage, birth control, education, sterilization, and
therapeutic abortion."

The same article said many of "our conscientious, thoughtful,
freedom-loving Catholic citizens" ask themselves:

" 'Can one at the same time be a good Catholic and a loyal

186

American citizen?'

I mIO

Catholics Help Masons

The idea that "conscientious, thoughtful, freedom-loving Catholic
citizens" would help Masonry make fundamental changes in the
Church was a view which persisted in the New Age for many years,
and proved to be quite accurate.

As far back as 1926, the New Age carried an article which said
the Craft should encourage its members to be active in Christian
churches. Every member "should cast his lot with the Church--to help
vitalize it, liberalize it, modernize it and render it aggressive and
efficient--to do less is treason to your country, to your Creator, and to
the obligation you have promised to obey."^^

However, it was not until the 1940s that the New Age began
reporting success in persuading Catholics to look favorably toward
the Craft.

In March, 1949, the magazine carried an editorial which said
Masonic anti-Catholicism is directed, not against the individual
Catholic, but against the system with which he, unfortunately, is
identified. However, the editor continued, when the individual Catholic
"gets spunk enough to tell his hierarchy what he wants done," and
makes them do it, instead of "grovelling under fear and threats," then
the individual Catholic "will find himself welcomed by his fellow
citizens as part of the American scene--a culture that is white,
Protestant and Anglo Saxon."

Another editorial in the same publication said Masons must
educate Americans about Roman Catholics and "recover and
maintain our integrity as a political national sovereignty, free from
theocratic interference by the Romish-Church State . . . .Help will
come from lay Roman Catholics and many priests . . .

In 1955, the New Age ran a three-part series of articles which
discussed the view that Catholicism is incompatible with democracy,
and that Catholics should "repudiate" the anti-democratic doctrines of
their Church.

The article by Harold Rafton had previously appeared as a
pamphlet published by the Beacon Press, the publishing arm of the
Unitarian Gniversalist Church, an organization which has always been
closely allied with Freemasonry.

Rafton said there is hope for America if Catholics in this country
cleanse the Church of its anti-democratic doctrines, and organize

187

small groups in each parish to "request frequent itemized accountings
of all the money received by their parish church." CJntil such a report
is made by the pastor, the article admonished, Catholics should not
contribute to their parish.

He characterized refusal to contribute to support of the Church as
"a mortal sin," but opined that "no just God will condemn them to Hell
merely for wanting to know how their money is spent." [Emphasis in
original].^®

Discussing small parish groups, the article said members of those
groups should "obtain the right to cooperate in drawing up their
church budget, to pass on the desirability of individual items and to
keep expenditures within the financial resources of the parish. The
motto should be, 'no taxation without representation.' They may thus
be able to curb expensive building programs the Church may have
planned, but for which the Catholic layman can ill afford to pay."^^
Other points made in the article were:

* Parishioners should gain control of Church property.

* Parishioners should insist that lay Catholics sit on
parochial school boards, and make sure "no taint of any anti¬
democratic doctrine" is "taught in the religious courses or in
any other subject."

* Let the laity choose their clergy rather than be
"dependent for their positions on a foreign source" and follow
its bidding.

* When the above are accomplished. Catholics can
"demand the elimination of anti-Democratic Catholic
doctrines."^®

Concluding, Rafton said: "When that happy day comes," non-
Catholics will be able to assure their Catholic fellow citizens "that the
tension between us will disappear like snow in the warm sun."^^

Rafton's call was echoed four years later by the Grand
Commander of Scottish Rite Masonry. Catholics, he said, should
manage and control the Church so there would be no more demands
for tax support for parochial schools "because most of the children
would be attending public schools; the obnoxious Catholic 'Medical
Code' for nurses, doctors and hospitals, and opposition to birth control
would have been abolished . . .and the Church's propaganda barrage
for the election of a Roman Catholic President would subside. Liberty,
Equality and Fraternity would be a reality in America."^®

Like the constant rush of water on a stone, the Masonic campaign

188

apparently was making an impression within the Church itself.

in 1961, the New Age called attention to a column by Msgr.
George W. Casey in the Boston Pilot, the Archdiocesan weekly organ,
which urged closing of parochial schools to eliminate Catholic
"separation and inbreeding." The Monsignor also reportedly called for
an end to novenas which are conducted "for palpably profit motives . .

m21

Subsequently, it was reported that "many Roman Catholics" are
now opposed to parochial schools, which segregate Roman Catholics
into scholastic enclaves, a medieval concept which ... is bad for the
Church and bad for the Nation.

The same report said Richard Cardinal Cushing of Boston
opposed financing of Church-related schools, and that some Catholic
school administrators desire to break away from their traditional
structure "which requires that their schools be directed by parish
pastors controlled by the hierarchy."^^

in 1971, the Grand Commander invited attention to a controversial
book. Are Parochial Schools The Answer? by Mary Perkins Ryan,
which recommended severe cutbacks in parochial schools. About the
same time, the Masonic chieftain reported, a Catholic lay group met
at La Jolla, California, where the president of the organization
declared: "We are against putting tax funds into a secret organization
that never divulges what it does with its money or documents the
need for financing.

The striking aspect of the Rafton series of articles, as well as
subsequent articles and commentaries in the New Age, was that the
changes recommended for the Catholic Church, in America, actually
were adopted.

Specifically: powerful lay-dominated parish councils were
established throughout the Clnited States, and members of these
bodies immediately demanded a full accounting of parish income and
expenditures.

As a result, school personnel were given salaries to begin
competing, at first modestly, with tax-paid public school personnel.
Accordingly, tuitions were increased dramatically.

Previously, it had been common for parochial school employees
to work more for the glory of God, and less for material wealth.
Moreover, parish communities had been more amenable to bearing
the full costs of parochial education, or, alternatively, tuition costs
were kept very nominal, it had not been unusual for tuition costs to be
in the $50-per-year range, and additional children in the same family
were given very low group rates.

189

The increased tuition, which began running to high three and low
to mid-four figures, forced a growing number of Catholic children into
public schools, where religion was not a subject for discussion,
except as those schools imposed a secularist value system. That
development had long been an avid desideratum of Masonry.

Although Church property has remained under control of the local
ordinaries, new church buildings no longer were distinguished by
inspirational architecture, and interior appointments were jettisoned.

Sacred tabernacles, where God Himself in the Blessed Sacrament
reposed--the very focal point of every Catholic church--were
removed to side altars or sacristies. Beautiful marble altars often were
torn out, as were altar rails at which the faithful for centuries had
reverently knelt to adore and receive the Sacred Host. Statues of
Saints were largely dispensed with, as were the silent, flickering
flames of vigil lights, symbolic of prayers rising after the petitioner
had left the church. Stations of the Cross, by which Catholics fervently
recalled Christ's Passion, were often discarded; so, too, were
novenas, the Rosary, Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament, and
Benediction. The carnage wreaked in the Church called to mind
Psalm 73 (Douay):

"Remember thy congregation, which thou hast possessed
from the beginning . . .

See what things the enemy hath done wickedly in the
sanctuary . . .

As with axes in a wood of trees, they have cut down at
once the gates thereof, with axe and hatchet they have
brought it down.

They have set fire to thy sanctuary: they have defiled the
dwelling place of thy name on the earth."

And there was more. A new emphasis was given to democratic
procedures in a Church which, from its founding, had been
hierarchical and authoritarian. Indeed, it was evident that the old
heresy of "Americanism," condemned at the turn of the Century by
Pope Leo Xlll, was again underway. A concerted effort was being
made to establish an American Catholic Church, as distinguished
from the Roman Catholic Church in America. The new emphasis
would tailor the traditional teachings of the Roman Catholic Church to
the consensus of the American people, rather than to the orthodox
teachings of the Holy Father and the Church's Magisterium.

The most evident sign of consensus morality was the massive
opposition by a small army of theologians and other priests and nuns-

190

-as well as millions of laity--to Pope Paul Vi's Encyclical Letter,
Humanae Vitae, which stated that the Church will not change its
consistent teaching that artificial contraception is sinful.

Like the Reformation of the 16th Century, the Church's liturgy
placed a new emphasis upon the Bible as it subdued preaching about
the efficacy of the Sacraments, particularly weekly or monthly
Confession. Sin faded almost into oblivion. All who said "Lord, Lord"
were saved.

As in Protestantism, so in the new Catholicism, there "was a
tendency to minimize liturgy and to stress preaching by the ministry
and the reading of the Bible."

A growing belief became manifest among theologians and laity
that individual conscience is the valid interpreter of Scripture. Also a
growing nationalism and a revivification of the 15th-Century conciliar
movement--the attempt to establish the superiority of the ecumenical
council over the Pope--became apparent.

Another episode which indicated Masonic philosophy was having
its effect on influencing ages-old Catholic thought was the action by
Catholic colleges and universities to establish lay control over their
institutions in order to obviate denial of funds by federal. State, and
local governments and foundations.^^ Academic freedom superseded
obedience to Church teaching.

A parallel effort to lure Catholics into the Fraternity was a
propaganda campaign which claimed that many members of the
Catholic clergy had been won to Masonry's banner over the years,
most notably Pope Pius IX.

According to an editorial in the New Age, the Pontiff, when a priest
on assignment in Chile, had joined the Fraternity in 1823 under his
pre-Pontifical family name, Giovanni M. Ferretti. However, the
editorial said he was expelled March 27, 1874.^®

Pius IX reigned from June 21, 1846 until February 7, 1878, and
issued a number of condemnations of Freemasonry. Even the New
Age said the Pontiffs "Syllabus of Errors," which was an integral part
of his Encyclical Letter, Quanta Cura (December 8, 1864), "is the
most dogmatic attack on freedom ever penned by a human being.

Actually, Pius IX published four other Encyclicals opposing
Masonry, beginning with Qui Pluribus, issued November 9, 1846,
shortly after he was elected Pope. He also "attributed Masonry to
Satan.Pius IX obviously had left Masonry long before 1874--if
indeed he had ever joined.

191

Catholic Rapprochement With Masonry

A review of Catholic publications over a 40-year period shows
development of a gradual change in Catholic thought toward
Freemasonry that ranged from outright condemnation at the
beginning of the period studied, to a slow but sure tendency toward
acceptance of membership in the Fraternity as a brotherly thing to do,
particularly because Masonry in America was said to be different
from what it is in Europe and Latin America.

In 1934, Father James Magner wrote that Catholics are forbidden
to join the Craft because it "has the characteristics of a religious sect.
. .with its own religious symbolism derived from the Old Testament,
and its own ritual."

Continuing, the priest said. Masonry historically "has identified
itself as a social and political body whose aims are "hostile to the
rights of the Catholic Church." It is "the outstanding proponent of
secularism," and many of the "severest persecutions" of the Church
in modern times "have come from Masonic sources."^®

In 1938, the Jesuit national weekly, America, ran a commentary
which said Masons in the Clnited States were rather conservative and
"not rabidly anti-CathoIic." However, the commentary continued, the
Craft was undergoing a "most insidious change" by which Cl.S.
Masonry was being endangered by "a most secret impenetration of
the Orient from Paris," particularly in the cities of New York and
Washington, D.C.^®

In 1949, a prominent student of Masonry, William J. Whalen, said
the Church traditionally had condemned the Craft primarily because
of its naturalism, "which undermines the Christian faith and promotes
indifferentism and contempt for religious authority." But, he noted.
Masons in the Clnited States "do not attack the Church with the vigor
and relish" of their brethren in Europe.^ ^

The New Age reported that during Easter Week, 1950, priests in
Montreal, Canada warned parishioners against Joining Masonry under
penalty of excommunication.

The 1950 report said Father M. Cordovani, a Dominican and
Master of the Apostolic Sacred Palaces in Rome, had written in Le
Devoir, a Montreal daily, that "a movement is on foot" to bring about a
reconciliation between the Church and that portion of Masonry which
is considered "not to be antagonistic" toward Catholicism. Such a
reconciliation, said the priest, is "an impossibility."^^

The same editorial said the Masonic Light of Huntingdon, Quebec,

192

had reported that Father Joseph Bertheloot, S.J., had written three
books on the urgency of concluding an accord between Masonry and
Catholicism. The Light said it was hardly conceivable that the Jesuit
priest "would publish such views as he expresses without having
received the approval of his superiors.

The editor of the Quebec Masonic journal commented: "[W]e are
frankly mystified that the Dominican Cordovan! should express an
opinion so diametrically opposed to that of Father Bertheloot!"

Addressing that latter remark, the New Age said: "We are not
mystified at these interplays of attitudes by the heads of the leading
orders of the Roman Catholic Church toward the Masonic Fraternity."
But, said the New Age, Fr. Bertheloot's wish "can never be had."^"^

Continuing, the Scottish Rite editorial said "the greatest harm"
could be done to Masonry in the event a number of Catholics Joined
the Fraternity who were not "true Masons at heart." The editorial
added: "Much depends upon the early ethical rearing of a candidate
for the Craft.

As it turned out. Father Cordovan! was completely accurate in his
prediction, and his prophetic understanding of the situation became
evident rather quickly.

Just the next year (1951), for example, the Jesuit weekly,
America, carried an editorial which said Catholics in the Clnited States
"used to be much agitated about the anti-Catholicism of American
Freemasons." But, said America, Northern Masons (as distinct from
the Scottish Rite of the Southern Jurisdiction) have demonstrated
friendliness and fairness in dealing with Catholics, and "have largely
dropped the issue.

Explaining the putative friendliness and fairness of the Northern
Masons, the Jesuit editorial cited the fact that President Franklin D.
Roosevelt, a Mason, had selected two Catholics for his first Cabinet,
and also pointed out that Catholic students were treated on an equal
basis in the National Youth Administration program, as well as under
the World War 11 veterans assistance program, generally referred to as
the "G.l. Bill of Rights." Moreover, Roosevelt had appointed his own
personal representative to the Vatican, said America.

On the other hand, the Jesuit editorial deplored the "incessant
anti-Catholicism of the Scottish Rite Freemasons of the Southern
Jurisdiction," particularly in the field of education. It was then
suggested that "our Northern Masonic friends" look into the close tie
between Southern Masonry and anti-Catholic, anti-Negro policies--or,
the editorial concluded, "Is it only Southern?"^®

Apparently, America's editorial writer was not well informed about

193

President Roosevelt. For example, The New York Times noted in 1932
that the Vatican daily, L'Osservatore Romano, had charged that
Communism, in league with Freemasons, was at the bottom of the
religious troubles in Mexico. It was a conflict in which the national law
limited the Catholic people to one priest for every 100,000 members
of the faithful.^®

Roosevelt was appealed to repeatedly, and in vain, by the Knights
of Columbus to take action which would relieve the persecution of
Catholics in Mexico. In February, 1935, the Knights wrote a letter
telling the President they had "documentary proof of the tearing down
of crucifixes . . .and the shooting of Catholics and priests on the steps
of churches."'^®

On December 17, 1935, the Knights wrote a letter to Mr. Roosevelt
protesting his lack of action, not only on behalf of Catholics in Mexico,
but also his decision to ignore the closing of Baptist missions and
Mormon temples in that country. The letter pointed out that other Cl.S.
protests concerning acts of discrimination against religious groups in
foreign lands had resulted in the Clnited States making representations
to the governments involved in 1833, 1870, 1876, 1893, and 1903.^^

The Jesuit editor also overlooked the fact that Roosevelt was an
ardent Scottish Rite Mason of the Southern Jurisdiction and, in 1933,
in the regalia of the Georgia Grand Lodge of Masons, had raised his
son, Elliot, to the degree of Master Mason at Architect Lodge 519 in
New York City.^^

The senior Roosevelt's Southern Masonic affiliation came about in
connection with his visits to Warm Springs, Georgia, where he
regularly went for treatment of his polio condition.

The President also was a member of the Northern Jurisdiction's
Lodge No. 8 in New York City, a Knight Templar, a 32nd Degree
Mason, and a member of the Mystic Shrine.

There was more commentary in America on Freemasonry in
1956. An article in the Catholic weekly stated that Fr. Bertheloot
"never entertained any illusions" and did not seek acceptance by the
Church of Masonic positions which were "doctrinally or
psychologically out of the question." Nevertheless, the article said, it
was hard to believe that Bertheloot's efforts "have had no impact at
all upon the course of this historic conflict.

Jesuit involvement in the Church's apparent rapprochement with
Masonry took an interesting turn when the Scottish Rite's Grand
Commander, Luther Smith, revealed that during a visit to Rome, Italy,
in 1957, he found that a Masonic group sponsored by Jesuits was
attempting to organize there.

194

In 1958, the national Jesuit weekly ran an article in which a priest
scolded the Church for lack of tolerance which prevented him from
advancing into the higher degrees of Freemasonry.

This priest, Father Walter M. Abbott, S.J., wrote that he was the
grandson of a 32nd Degree Mason, and had been entitled as a youth
to belong to several organizations allied with Masonry.

He said that as far as the Craft was concerned, his Catholicism
"would not have prevented me from entering the Masonic order itself
when 1 reached 21." He and his father had become converts to
Catholicism."^®

However, the priest noted, his entrance into the Jesuit order
prevented him from becoming a 32nd Degree Mason, although he
could advance as far as the 17th Degree.

Fr. Abbott said all Christians should be against Masonry because
"Masonic oaths are violations of the Second Commandment of God."
At the same time, he insisted that the secrets sworn to by Masons
concern "only trivial things" in the early Masonic degrees."^^

He expressed the view that the Papacy in its numerous
condemnations of the Fraternity referred primarily to Grand Orient
Freemasonry, although he provided no citations from the Papal
documents which supported that allegation."^®

The article further substantiated why the Church has exhibited a
lack of tolerance toward the Craft. Father Abbott said Masonry, "in its
basic degrees, is at least indifferent to Christianity, and probably
inimical to it." Moreover, he observed that in the 30th Degree ritual a
papal tiara is pierced by a sword and trampled upon--and not only the
tiara, but a royal crown as well."^®

In 1961, Father Michael Riquet, S.J., appeared before a group of
500 Masons to argue that the Fraternity and Catholics are "separated
brothers."®®

Efforts by the Jesuits to bring Masonry into the Catholic Church
were abetted by Father John A. O'Brien of the Clniversity of Notre
Dame. He began meeting with Masonic leaders after he read that the
Grand Commander of the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction had "banned
all political material" in Scottish Rite publications under his
jurisdiction as a reaction to the mass of anti-Catholic mail which was
flooding Boston during the Presidential campaign of John F. Kennedy.

The Northern Masonic chieftain reportedly declared that if a
Catholic was willing to die for his country, his faith "should be no
barrier" to serving as commander-in-chief of the military as President
of the Clnited States.

After reading that comment, Fr. O'Brien sent the Masonic leader a

195

note of "gratitude and commendation." As a result, a friendship
developed between the two men which "was destined to have
farreaching consequences."^^

On January 18, 1961, Albert N. Hepler, Jr., 33rd Degree Mason, of
South Bend, Indiana, telephoned the Notre Dame priest to say the
Grand Commander of the Northern Jurisdiction and other members of
the Supreme Council of Masonry wished to meet the cleric at a motel
on the Notre Dame campus where the Masonic group happened to be
staying.

The priest later said that that visit had led to several similar
gatherings, and soon leaders of the Knights of Columbus began
meeting with the Masons.

In 1965, Bishop Leo A. Pursley of Fort Wayne-South Bend
addressed a group of Masons at the Scottish Rite Temple in South
Bend, Indiana. During his remarks, the prelate said: " . . .with honest
effort to achieve mutual understanding, with a growing sense of the
bonds that unite us . . .we can all bear witness to the truth in which we
believe . . . ."

Bishop Pursley was introduced by Father O'Brien's Masonic
friend, Albert Hepler, who said the meeting was "an attempt to display
our appreciation for what they [the Fathers of Vatican Council II] have
done . . .to help set the wheels of action rolling . . .that someday we
may truly go together as the sons of God."^^

O'Brien himself began speaking at Masonic gatherings, as did
Bishop Robert Joyce of Burlington, Vermont, Richard Cardinal
Cushing of Boston, and John Cardinal Cody of Chicago.

Meanwhile, the New Age reported that on December 6, 1964, Pope
Paul VI, at Vatican II, had agreed to make it easier for Roman
Catholics who had become Freemasons to be reconciled with the
Church. This was to be accomplished simply by a Catholic Mason
going to Confession to any priest, explaining the reasons for the
penitent's membership in the Craft, and asking for absolution.
Previously, membership in the Masonic Fraternity had been
considered a reserved sin which caused automatic
excommunication, and could be absolved only by a bishop or the
Pope himself.^^

Father O'Brien pressed on. In September, 1966, he commented:
"Surely the time has come for the Church in the Cl.S.A. to establish a
commission for dialogue with the leaders of Masonry with a view
toward removing any obstacles to Catholic membership therein."

He characterized as "unfortunate, unnatural and pathological" the
fact that Catholics could not be active members of the nation's largest

196

fraternal organization, it was his view that the Church soon would "re¬
examine the causes and circumstances of its ban against Catholics
joining a Masonic lodge." Freemasonry in America, he insisted, is
"far from being the enemy of religion, [but rather is] a mighty and
powerful ally of religion."^®

The Notre Dame priest, not surprisingly, was supported by the
Jesuits at America magazine. A 1967 editorial in that publication,
titled "Milestones in Ecumenism," argued that Church laws against
Catholics joining the Craft "are the reaction of the Church to European
Masonry, the history and objective of which have fully merited
condemnation."

Continuing, the Jesuit journal asserted: "Since American Masonry
has demonstrated its willingness and eagerness to collaborate with
Catholic organizations on matters of mutual concern, a revision of
Church law on the subject of membership in the Masons is very much
in order . . .

But that argument did not convince one knowledgeable reader of
the Jesuit weekly. Responding to the America editorial, William J.
Whalen wrote the editor:

"By what stretch of the imagination would Catholic
cooperation with, or membership in, an oath-bound secret
society, such as Freemasonry, constitute a 'Milestone in
Ecumenism' . . .? Does not ecumenism refer to the reunion of
Christian churches and communions?

"Are you aware that American Freemasonry is strictly
segregated, and that even if Catholics were allowed to join,
those Catholics who are Negroes would be refused initiation
by the 16,000 regular lodges?"^®

But Mr. Whalen's letter was in vain. Responding to an inquiry from
John Cardinal Krol, Archbishop of Philadelphia and President of the
National Conference of Catholic Bishops (NCCB), Franjo Cardinal
Seper, Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith, wrote from the Vatican on July 19, 1974 that "various situations
of each country did not permit the Holy See to change [Canon Law],"
and such legislation would remain in force until the new Canon Law
was published.

Continuing, the letter from the Vatican said:

"As for particular cases, it is appropriate to recall that
penal law must always be interpreted restrictively. One can
therefore teach with certainty and apply the opinion of the

197

authors stating that Canon 2335 [pertaining to Catholic
membership in Freemasonry] concerns only Catholics who
belong to associations acting against the Church. [Emphasis
added].

"It is still, and in all cases, forbidden for clerics, religious
and members of secular institutes to belong to a Masonic
association."^®

It was apparent that the Jesuits and Father O'Brien of Notre Dame
had won their case. Catholics could join Masonic lodges in the CJnited
States because, either the specific argument of the editors of America
magazine and the Notre Dame priest, or a similar one, had been
accepted by the Sacred Congregation at the Vatican. That argument
held that Freemasonry is different in the CJnited States and other
geographic locales from what it is in Masonic "associations acting
against the Church" in Europe and elsewhere.

The rationale for permitting Catholics to Join an oath-bound
Fraternity whose philosophy has consistently been diametrically
opposed to 2,000 years of Church belief and teaching is inexplicable,
unless one believes that Freemasonry has penetrated the Vatican
itself.

The Roman Catholic Church is the one institution in all the world
that has understood and fought that international secret society for
250 years. To believe the Craft is different in the CJnited States than
elsewhere is to ignore totally two-and-one-half centuries of historic
evidence, current Masonic documents, and the wording of rituals
attendant to Masonic initiation ceremonies.

Certainly, Masons in the CJnited States are required to take solemn
oaths never to divulge the Craft's secrets. Those oaths before fellow
lodge members are accompanied by grave promises to accept cruel
and unusual punishment, including death itself, if one should divulge
any secrets of the Order. CJnder such circumstances, how can any
bishop, pastor or confessor truly be certain that Masonry in the CJnited
States differs from Masonry in Europe or elsewhere?

Moreover, as has been evidenced in the preceding pages, Scottish
Rite Masonry's Grand Philosopher, as well as many other high-
ranking members of the Fraternity, have stated that the Craft is the
successor to the Ancient Mysteries, and the CJniversal Morality based
upon Kabbalistic Gnosticism.

Further, the Fraternity considers itself "not merely . . .the
handmaid of religion, but the original deposit of secret, sacerdotal
science upon which all the world's great faiths have been erected."®®

J98

The Craft also has been defined as "a sacramental system,
possessing like all sacraments, an outward and visible side
[explained as its ceremonial doctrine and symbols], and an inward,
intellectual and spiritual side, which is concealed . . .

Not to be overlooked by those interested in preserving the
integrity of the Church is the fact that the Fraternity meets in
"temples" and "cathedrals," and the formal headquarters of the
Scottish Rite of the Southern Jurisdiction is referred to by the
ecclesiastical term, "See."

Also, Masons view the Bible as a symbol of the Book of Nature, or
the code of human reason.®^ At lodge meetings the "square is
superimposed upon the Bible," in order that Masons "may ever be
guided by reason, and that even the Book of Religion shall be read
only in the light of reason and exact knowledge."®^

Yet, despite those readily available facts, a number of Catholic
bishops in the CJnited States suddenly rushed to apologize for the
Church's centuries-old view of, and implacable opposition to.
Freemasonry.

On March 28, 1976, the late Terence Cardinal Cook, Archbishop of
New York, appeared as the principal speaker at a gathering of 3,000
Masons attending their annual breakfast in that city. The New York
Ordinary characterized the meeting as a "joyful event" on the "road of
friendship" between the Roman Catholic Church and Freemasonry.

He "lamented" past estrangements over a period of 238 years
between "your ancestors" and "some clerics," and said whatever had
happened in the past "should not stand between us and the future."®^

in its report on the meeting. The New York Times said, "Many
Roman Catholics are affiliated with the Masonic fraternity today.

Later that year, the Vatican daily, L'Osservatore Romano,
published an article by Dominican Father Georges Cottier, consultant
to the Vatican's Secretariat for Non-Believers, in which the priest
attacked dissident Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre of Econe, Switzerland,
because the Swiss prelate and his followers "see in the motto of the
French Revolution, 'Liberty, Equality, Fraternity,' the essence of all the
evils of the modern world and the expression of its apostasy."

Such people, the Vatican consultant said, seem unaware that
"Liberty, Equality and Fraternity" have become part of the Church's
agenda, and had been endorsed in conciliar documents on religious
liberty, ecumenism, and the Church.®® CJnfortunately, Fr. Cottier never
quoted the various conciliar documents in which the Masonic motto,
or its equivalent, might be found.

Manifestly, Catholics were affiliating with Masonry, and it is

199

reasonable to assume that Masonry had penetrated the highest levels
of the Church.

This was clearly evident when the Grand Master of Italian
Masonry, Lino Salvini, stated in a 1978 telephone conversation with a
reporter for the National Catholic News Service (NC News) that there
are "very fine relations between the Church and the Masons." The
Grand Master added: "We have priests and even bishops" who are
members of the Craft.®^

in the CJnited States, Bishop Louis Gelineau of Providence, Rhode
Island was presented with the Grand Master Award on March 5, 1981
by Rhode Island's Grand Lodge of Masonry for "best exemplifying the
principles of Freemasonry."

The Providence prelate said he had permitted Catholics to join the
Masons, although each request was decided on an individual basis.®®

On March 13, 1984, Religious News Service (RNS) reported that
the editor of The Oklahoma Mason, James Maynard, was at that time
a Master Mason and a Roman Catholic.

The report also said Maynard had been initiated into the Order of
DeMolay (the youth arm of Freemasonry) on February 17, 1974, after
he "got the green light" from his pastor.

Subsequently, Maynard rose to become head of the Oklahoma
State Chapter of DeMolay. His deputy was Bruce Gros, who was
studying to be a Catholic priest in the Tulsa diocesan seminary.®®

it would seem that pastors had been permitting Catholics to enter
Masonry some years before Cardinal Seper's letter to Cardinal Krol
on July 19, 1974, concerning the moral liceity of Catholic

membership in the international secret Fraternity.

in that connection, it will be recalled that the Vatican Prefect
informed Cardinal Krol that the existing Canon law then in force
(which prohibited membership of Catholics in the Masonic Fraternity)
would remain authoritative (in most instances) "until the new Canon
Law is published."

The new Canon Law was published in Advent, 1983, and pointedly
did not mention Freemasonry at all.

The old law (Canon 2335) read: "All those who enroll their names
in the sect of Freemasons or similar associations which plot against
the Church or the legitimate civil authorities incur by this very fact the
penalty of excommunication, absolution from which is reserved
simply to the Holy See."

The new Code (Canon 1374) reads: "A person who joins an
association which plots against the Church is to be punished with a
just penalty; one who promotes or takes office in such an association

200

is to be punished with an interdict."^®

Notably absent from the new Code is any mention of
"Freemasons," plotting against "the legitimate civil authorities," or
"excommunication."

Those sympathetic to Masonry apparently had done their job well.
The new Canon clearly facilitated the entry of Catholics into Masonry
if pastors or bishops determined that a lodge did not plot against the
Church, or, indeed, if an individual Catholic was convinced such was
the case.

Moreover, the new law, by omitting any objection to plotting
against "the legitimate civil authorities," as the prior law had
stipulated, tacitly suggested that the Church did not object to
Catholics engaging in revolutionary activities. Such activities are
virtually integral to Liberation Theology, a new mind-set which has
been devastating the Church in Central and Latin America.

However, simultaneous with the issuance of the new Code, the
Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, now under the
leadership of Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, issued a Declaration which
had the effect of modifying the new Canon law. The Declaration said
Masonic membership is a serious sin that denies to Catholics "the
right to approach Holy Communion."

The document also affirmed that the Church's "negative position
on Masonic associations . . .remains unaltered," because the Craft's
principles "have always been regarded as irreconcilable with the
Church's doctrine." Catholic affiliation with the Masonic Fraternity,
Cardinal Ratzinger said, "remains prohibited by the Church.

On March 11, 1985, an unsigned editorial concerning Catholic
membership in Freemasonry appeared on the front page of
L'Osservatore Romano. Vaticanologists viewed the editorial as having
been written by Cardinal Ratzinger, particularly in view of its many
references to SCDF, an abbreviation for the Sacred Congregation for
the Doctrine of the Faith.

The editorial's condemnation of Masonry was expressed with a
vigor reminiscent of that found in Leo Xlll's Humanum Genus. Four
times the document stated that Christianity and Freemasonry are
fundamentally "irreconcilable." The second paragraph of the
document said the Church long had held Masonry to be "responsible
for subversive activity" against the Church.

Some Catholics, it was observed, believe Freemasonry does not
impose any "principles" of a religious or philosophic nature, but rather
bonds men of goodwill to "humanistic values comprehensible and
acceptable to everyone." Commenting on that view held by some

201

Catholics, the editorial cautioned that Masonry's obligations are "of an
extremely binding nature," reinforced by a "rigid rule of secrecy."
Such a climate of secrecy, the Vatican editorial said, "entails above
all the risk of becoming an instrument of strategies unknown to
them."^^

Moreover, the L'Osservatore editorial pointed out, it is "not within
the competence of local ecclesiastical authorities to give a judgment
on the nature of Masonic associations which would imply a derogation
from what has been decided above.

Once again, Rome had condemned membership in Masonic
organizations, and the message prompted the CJ.S. hierarchy to issue
a statement which broadly supported Cardinal Ratzinger's view.

On April 19, 1985, the Committee for Pastoral Research and
Practices of the NCCB, under the chairmanship of Bernard Cardinal
Law, Archbishop of Boston, issued a confidential report to all Catholic
bishops. The report said Freemasonry is "irreconcilable" not only
with Catholicism but with all Christianity. A background study
accompanying the Committee's statement sharply criticized the
"pseudo-lslamic ritual" of the nation's 600,000 members of the
Shrine, an adjunct of Masonry.^^

Despite the Church's most recent pronouncements on Catholic-
Masonic relations, a question remains as to how those statements
have impacted upon Masonic influence in the Church, particularly in
view of the disparity in practice between Canon law and the
Declaration by the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
The evidence suggests that Freemasonry has gained the upper hand,
at least momentarily, in this protracted conflict between two ages-old,
implacable enemies.

202

PART III

TARGET-THE STATE

203

10/ WARRING ON THE STATE

The idea that a relative handful of men have conspired for years to
rule nations and the world according to their philosophy is difficult for
many people to grasp.

Yet, most thoughtful people will concede that Hitler, Mussolini, Tojo
and Stalin pursued that very idea and precipitated incalculable
carnage.

Cecil Rhodes believed "the absorption of the greater portion of the
world under our [English] rule simply means the end of all wars." To
accomplish his goal of world domination under English rule, Rhodes
drew up the first of six wills in which he stipulated that a secret society
was to carry out his scheme.^ Later, he conceived of world
domination in federation with the United States, using "a secret
society gradually absorbing the wealth of the world." This plan is the
"meaning of his last will and the plan behind his scholarships."^

That secret organization envisioned by Rhodes became the Round
Table Group of England, the "real founders of the Royal Institute of
International Affairs . . .the Institute of Pacific Relations," and the
"godfathers" of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).^

Communism has long been recognized as a separate secret
conspiratorial movement to control the world. On the other hand,
Christianity is a completely open, non-secret "conspiracy or plan" to
bring all men to salvation through Jesus Christ.

So what of Freemasonry?

One knowledgeable member of the Craft said: "The nature of
Freemasonry and of its traditions is responsible for the difficulty the
historian encounters in evaluating the influence which the Fraternity
has exercised on the development of the Enlightenment . . .and all
other progressive ideologies . .

The "nature" and "traditions" of Masonry refer to the Fraternity's
secrecy. The great advantage of secrecy, in addition to advancing
Masonry's cause, is that it permits Masons and their supporters to use
no other argument than ridicule to dismiss charges that the Masonic
Order subverts Church and State--charges which have consistently
been brought against the Fraternity by various Popes and heads of
states.

204

Secrecy, said Albert Pike, "is indispensable to Masonry."^

In that connection. Masonry has 25 "Landmarks," or canons which
are "unrepealable," and can "never be changed."® Landmark No. 23
concerns "secrecy of the Institution." It admonishes initiates that to
change or abrogate such a requirement of confidentiality "would be
social suicide, and death of the Order would follow its legalized
exposure." Continuing, the same Landmark notes that Freemasonry
has lived unchanged for centuries as a secret association, but as an
open society, "it would not last for many years.

One wonders why the organization must be so secret. Why would
openness bring "death of the Order"? Why would it "not last for many
years" if its secret activities were unmasked? Certainly, that landmark
suggests the Craft is something more than a fraternal and charitable
organization. Why hide good works?

The answer is: Freemasonry in America and elsewhere is far
more than a fraternal organization. It never hides its charitable
endeavors. But its secret work is something else entirely. And that
secret work frequently has involved subversion of the existing
political order in any given State.

In 1884, Pope Leo XIll declared that Freemasonry uses "every
means of fraud or of audacity, to gain . . .entrance into every rank of
the State as to seem to be almost its ruling power."®

Just over 100 years later, an unsigned article appeared in the
authoritative Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, regarding
Masonry. The article was described by an official of the Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith as a Vatican "policy position." It said
Masonry was much more than an association of men of good will; that
the Craft involves moral obligations for its members, a rigid discipline
of mystery and a climate of secrecy that brings to members the risk
of becoming the instruments of strategies unknown to them.®

The hold of the Craft on initiates is almost total. One member of
the Fraternity said Masonry is one of the few organizations that is
"able to change the relationships created by nature," such as family
relationships.

To "produce the desired result," Masons must take vows and make
"a complete surrender" to the Masonic institution. And " . . .there can
be no reservations" to the new league.^®

Freemasonry, another Craftsman observed, "is--and must be--a
political force . . .the whole spirit of the Order, and especially of the
Scottish Rite, is a propulsion to political action."

One Grand Commander commenting favorably on Masonic
support for revolutions in different parts of the world noted:

205

"They were charged in the Lodges with teachings that
enabled them to become individual champions of democratic
progress and of religious and civil liberty."

Masonry's mark is embedded in the Great Seal of the CJnited
States,and the official seal of the Supreme Court of California was
marked with numerous Masonic symbols during the period 1850-

1873.14

The Fraternity's activities in the American Revolution, Mexico,
and the States of New York, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, as well
as Albert Pike's work in the Civil War were noted in Chapters One and
Two.

Masonry In The Civil War

The Craft's relationship to any nation was clearly explained at the
time of the Civil War in an 1861 letter from the Grand Lodge of York
Masons in Pennsylvania to their counterparts in Tennessee. The letter
said:

"Masonry is as old as government. It constitutes a
government in itself . . .

"Masonry is a sovereignty and a law unto itself . . .It
knows nothing but the principles and teachings of its faith.

"The proud position [of Masonry is to] stand aloof from the
rise and fall of empires, the disturbances in States, the wars of
contending nations, and rebellions and revolutions in
commonwealths or among people . . .

"The claims of a brother are not dissolved by war . . .the
tie once formed, is only sundered by death."

The same letter said: "By the ancient Constitutions of Masonry, a
brother, even when engaged in rebellion against his country, is still to
be considered as a Mason; his character as such being
indefeasible."^®

During the War of Secession, as the War Between the States is
sometimes called, the Onion Government was seriously concerned
about several secret subversive groups which operated in the North
and South during the Civil War. Although military records did not
formally identify any of those organizations with Freemasonry, the
groups shared characteristics common to the Masonic Fraternity. Like

206

Masonry, those secret units--

* Operated under a "Supreme Council" with a chief
executive at State level known as the "Grand Commander."

* Maintained a rigid secrecy about their activities.^®

* Held formal meetings in "lodges" and "temples."^®

* Restricted membership of the "vulgar herd" to the basic
"mysteries" of the group.^®

* Bound members by oaths which demanded blind
obedience to superiors.

* Threatened awesome bodily mutilations and death if
oaths of secrecy were violated.

* CJtilized passwords, hand grips, and signs of distress to
protect the secret societies and their members.^®

The Deputy Grand Commander of one of the secret societies,
Charles E. Dunn, of the Order of American Knights (OAK), insisted
that President Lincoln had "usurped" powers and thereby forfeited all
claim to support from members of the Order. Moreover, said Dunn,
action taken to force Lincoln's "expulsion" from power "is an inherent
right" which belongs to the Order, and is "not revolution.

Dunn's statement is quite similar to the following words found in
Albert Pike's Morals and Dogma: "[RJesistance to power usurped is
not merely a duty which man owes to himself and his neighbor, but a
duty which he owes to his God."^^

Secret agent William Taylor of the Onion's Provost Marshal's office
reported on an OAK Lodge meeting he attended, presided over by Dr.
John Shore, a St. Louis physician. During the meeting, attended by
149 Lodge members, it was announced that General Albert Pike had
"promised arms and equipment" for a military company then being
formed by the Lodge.

Subsequently, in a sworn statement. Dr. Shore denied membership
in OAK or any other secret political organizations. However, Shore did
admit membership in Masonry, and said his obligations to Masonry
are "most assuredly" sacred and "of paramount consideration."

In response to the Provost Marshal's question whether, "under
oath," he was permitted to reveal the secrets of Masonry before a
court of justice. Dr. Shore replied: "1 am not."^^

A Fourth Degree member of OAK, Green B. Smith, in a sworn
statement, said an oath of the Order was "paramount to every other
oath."

207

Smith further indicated that the OAK might well have had Masonic
roots when he noted that the Order "extends back to the Revolution of
1776, having had a previous existence up to the Rebellion."^®

OAK was organized in 1863 by Clement L. Valandigham, a
Democratic Congressman from Ohio. The Order was known also as
the Order of the Sons of Liberty and the Knights of the Order of the
Sons of Liberty.^®

Valandigham died June 17, 1871. His funeral was "under the
direction of the Masons," and "many members of the Masonic
fraternity" escorted his remains to his late residence.®®

According to the Judge Advocate General of the Onion Army, the
OAK Order engaged in the following activities:

* Aided soldiers to desert and protected deserters.

* Worked to undermine portions of the Army.

* Furnished lawyers to find "some quasi-legal pretext" to
help soldiers leave the Army.

* Imbued military camps with a spirit of discontent and
disaffection, and "whole companies were broken up."

* Members of the Order who were drafted into the Army
"were instructed . . .to use their arms against their fellow
soldiers, rather than the enemy, or, if possible, to desert to the
enemy."

* Assassinations and murders were carried out which were
"discussed at the councils of the Order."®^

President Andrew Johnson And Masonry

After Albert Pike had been tried and found guilty of treason for his
activities during the Civil War, Benjamin B. French, a 33rd Degree
Mason and member of the board of directors of the Supreme Council
of the Scottish Rite, wrote a letter, dated July 1, 1865, to President
Andrew Johnson (also a Mason) urging him to pardon Pike. Additional
appeals on Pike's behalf were made to the President by Masons from
different parts of the Clnited States.®^

On April 20, 1866, the Scottish Rite Supreme Council met in
Washington, at which time the Masons' Sovereign Grand Inspector
General, T. P. Shaffner of Kentucky, wrote to the Attorney General of
the United States to request that Pike be pardoned. Two days later, the
President's military aide wrote to the Attorney General, and "by order
of the President," directed him "to send to this office [the White House]

208

warrant for pardon of Albert Pike of Arkansas.

The following day, April 23, 1866, officials of the Supreme Council,
including Pike, "visited the President at the White House," and the
President handed Pike "a paper constituting a complete pardon for his
part in the Civil War."^'^

Nine months later, a list of "pardoned rebels," including Pike, was
released to the press. The list showed the names of the pardoned
individuals and the person or persons, if any, who had spoken on
behalf of the pardoned. The entry for Pike read:

"Albert Pike, rebel Brigadier-General; by Hon. B. B.
French, Col. T. P. Shaffner, and a large number of others.

in March, 1867, the House Judiciary Committee began an
investigation into charges by some Congressmen that Johnson should
be impeached. Later, when the committee finally issued its report, a
key charge against the President was that "he pardoned large
numbers of public and notorious traitors . .

Shortly after the impeachment investigation began. Pike and
General Gordon Granger met with President Johnson at the White
House for approximately three hours. Subsequent to that meeting.
General Granger was summoned before the Judiciary Committee,
where he was asked to disclose the substance of the conversation
with the President. The General told the committee:

"They [President Johnson and Pike] talked a great deal
about Masonry. More about that than anything else. And from
what they talked about between them, 1 gathered that he [Pike]
was the superior of the President in Masonry. 1 understood
from the conversation that the President was his subordinate
in Masonry. That was all there was to it. .

On June 20, 1867, the President received a delegation of Scottish
Rite officials in his bedroom at the White House, where he received
the 4th through the 32nd Degrees of the Scottish Rite "as an
honorarium."^®

Later that month, the President journeyed to Boston to dedicate a
Masonic temple. Accompanying him was General Granger and a
delegation of the Knights Templar.

Addressing a crowd of well-wishers at a Boston hotel. President
Johnson said he came to the city "for two reasons, one of which was
to visit the State of Massachusetts. There is another [reason], it is true.

209

to which I shall not allude on this occasion.

On June 25, The New York Times page one lead story was
headlined: "Masonic Celebration," and provided many details of the
history and growth of Masonry in Massachusetts. Strangely, however,
no mention was made of the investigation of the Fraternity by the
Massachusetts Legislature in 1834, which had reported that
Freemasonry was "a distinct Independent Government within our own
Government, and beyond the control of the laws of the land by means
of its secrecy, and the oaths and regulations which its subjects are
bound to obey, under penalty of death." (See supra, p. 35).

Actually, the Times was so obviously overwhelmed by the
Masonic event that four of the seven columns on page one of the June
25th issue of that newspaper were devoted to extolling Masonry.

The New York daily said the 16,000 marching Masons,
resplendent in their regalia, were so impressive that "a finer looking
body of men has never before been seen in this city or elsewhere.""^®
At the Masonic temple, the President was accompanied by
General Granger, Benjamin B. French and T. P. Shaffner.

During his address to the gathering, the President disclosed the
other reason he had come to the State of Massachusetts. He said:

"I should not have visited Massachusetts, at least on the
present occasion, had it not been for the order of Masonry. I
came in good faith for the express purpose of participating
and witnessing the dedication of this temple today to Masonry,
and as far as I could, let it be much or little, to give my
countenance and my sanction.

Clearly, Scottish Rite Freemasonry had a friend in President
Andrew Johnson.

Masonry And The Philippine Insurrection

Conventional wisdom says the Philippine Insurrection of 1896 was
ignited because of native opposition to the power of the Catholic
Church in the Islands. The revolutionary fire was fueled by the
writings of Jose Rizal, augmented by the political leadership of Emilio
Aguinaldo.'^^

Subsequently, during the Spanish-American War, Commodore
George Dewey furnished arms to Aguinaldo and urged him to rally the
Philippine people against the Spanish. However, when the United

210

States succeeded Spain as the ruling colonial power, Aguinaldo led a
new revolt that became largely a guerrilla action, and "cost far more
money and took far more lives than the Spanish-American War."^^
That is the conventional thumb-nail account of events in the
Philippines at the turn of the Century, but it is quite superficial and
misleading. In reality the Philippine Insurrection was orchestrated by
Freemasonry, and while Emilio Aguinaldo indeed led that revolution,
he did so as a dedicated member and tool of the Craft.

That insight into Philippine history was suppressed by the CJnited
States Government for 45 years, until it finally was revealed by
historian John T. Farrell in 1954."^'^

The CJnited States Government concealed the real history of the
Insurrection, according to a National Archives pamphlet, because of a
"reluctance to publish facts that might prove injurious to
exrevolutionists. Federal officials, and military personnel." Also some
people felt the War Department report "expressed a personal
viewpoint and was not an objective study of Philippine affairs.

Captain John R. M. Taylor, author of the War Department's
suppressed report, noted that lodges of the Masonic Grand Orient of
Spain were established in the Philippine Islands around 1890, and
proselytes from those lodges formed the Katipunan, a Tagalog
Masonic revolutionary organization."'*®

The Katipunan was the outgrowth of a series of nine associations
formed by a revolutionary clique to seek independence for the
Philippines. To accomplish that purpose, the clique mounted a
systematic attack on the monastic orders in the Islands to undermine
their prestige, "and to destroy their influence upon the great mass of
the population.""*^

An 1898 "Memorial" from the Dominican Fathers to the Spanish
Government said:

"In consequence of the teaching of the Freemasons, the
voice of the parish priest has no longer any effect on numbers
of the natives, especially at Manila and in the neighboring
provinces . . .

"The Freemasons . . . have recommended the war against
us. "48

And the Spanish commander of Manila's Civil Guard, Olegario
Diaz, wrote on October 28, 1896:

"It is fully proven that Masonry has been the principal

211

cause of the trouble in these islands, not only from the
advanced and irreligious ideas scattered about, but more by
the foundation of secret societies of a distinctly separatist
character.

Commander Diaz also said the Grand Master of the Spanish Grand
Orient had sent Masons to establish native Masonic lodges of
exclusive Tagalog character. Within five years, 180 Tagalog lodges
had been established in the Philippines.^®

The Masons planned and carried out a "brutal and shameless
campaign" against monastic Orders and constantly ridiculed religion.
Later, this campaign acquired a political character, which included
attacks on the central government and the authorities in the
Archipelago.^^

Jose Rizal established a secret society called the Philippine
League, to which only Masons were admitted to membership, its
purpose was to educate the people in liberal ideas and ultimately
armed rebellion.

The League was governed by a Supreme Council. The founders of
the organization "took a solemn oath on a human skull, which they
afterward kissed, and signed a document of agreement with their own
blood, making the necessary incision in one of their arms." Further,
every initiate "was bound to carry on the propaganda by every means
in his power. . .and under severe penalties to guard the secret oath, to
report everything they knew to the League, and to obey their
superiors blindly.

Organizers of the Katipunan and members of its first Supreme
Council also were members of Rizal's Philippine League.

One section of the oath taken by members of the Katipunan
asked:

"Do you swear before Our Lord Jesus that you will be able
to assassinate your parents, brothers, wives, sons, relatives,
friends, fellow townsmen or Katipunan brothers should they
forsake or betray our cause?"^"^

Punishment for disobeying Katipunan directives--which included
all Philippine people "whether they want to be or not"--was sobering, it
consisted of being buried alive and then having the murdered
person's possessions--including his family--taken by members of an
organization called the "Mandudicut." That punishment was decreed
by Emilio Aguinaldo, the Katipunan Supreme Leader and dictator.^^

212

Information about some of the operations of the Katipunan was
furnished by a member of the organization, Teodoro Patino, a printer
for Diario de Maniia, a iocai daiiy. Patino gave the information to his
sister, who was a student at the Cathoiic coiiege at Lauban, operated
by the Sisters of Charity. The giri toid the Mother Superior, who iater
interviewed the printer. The Mother Superior toid Patino to pass the
information to Father Mariano Gii, his pastor, which he did.

As a resuit, documents were seized at the Diario, a number of
members of the Katipunan were arrested and numerous ietters and
other materiai were found which corroborated Patino's statement.

Further corroboration was provided by a report of isabeio de Los
Royes, who had gathered most of his information in prison from a
Katipunan member.^®

The CJ.S. War Department document inciudes a report by the Civii
Governor of Maniia, Manuei Luengo, to the Spanish Coioniai Minister.
The report, dated October 1, 1896, inciudes "An Extraordinary
Document of Phiiippine Masonry, Giving instructions To Be Carried
Out At The Outbreak Of The Rebeiiion." The "instructions" say, in
part:

"Fourth. Whiie the attack is being made on the Captain-
Generai and other Spanish authorities, the men who are ioyai
wiii attack the convents and behead their infamous
inhabitants. As for the riches contained in said convents, they
wiii be taken over by this G.R. Log. [i.e.. Grand Regionai
Lodge]....

* * Hs

"Seventh. The bodies of the friars wiii not be buried, but
wiii be burned in just payment for the crimes which during
their iives they committed against the nobie Fiiippinos for
three centuries of hatefui domination."

Names iisted at the end of the "instructions" are shown as
"President of the Executive Committee, Boiiva. The Vice Grand
Master, Gordiano Bruno. The Grand Secretary Gaiiieo."^^

Captain Tayior said other documents show the names actuaiiy are
pseudonyms for President Andres Bonifacio; Vice Grand Master, Pio
Vaienzueia; and Grand Secretary, Emiiio Jacinto.

Bonifacio seized the leadership of the Katipunan in January, 1896,
and turned the Masonic Supreme Council of that organization into the
insurgent government of the Philippines, with himself as dictator.^®

213

Emilio Aguinaldo succeeded him.

The American Connection With Philippine

Masonry

Insurgent Record No. 8 lists letters found in the papers of E. A.
(Emilio Aguinaldo) which show that a Masonic Lodge called "Patria"
was used to cover insurgent intrigues in October, 1899.

Insurgent Record No. 9 is a copy of an undated letter from Juan
CJtor y Fernandez, a 33rd Degree Mason, to CJ.S. Army Chaplain
Charles Pierce, relative to the establishment of a newspaper to be
named "Patria." The letter to Chaplain Pierce says the "brothers [l.e..
Freemasons] who put their confidence in me . . . [believe that] by your
and my cooperating with our brother American Masons, and
especially with the good will and wishes of Senor Otis, may cause the
happy day [of peace] to arrive ..."

Continuing, Fernandez said he expected the cooperation of "the
most worthy General Otis, and our brothers . .

Another letter by Fernandez, now shown as editor of La Patria
Democratic Daily, to Don Ambrosio Flores, dated October 8, 1899,
introduces the bearer of the letter, one Senor Giselda, who has with
him a copy of La Patria. The letter urges Flores to read and provide
Fernandez with an opinion of the publication. Fernandez's letter
added:

"I am in relation with some American brothers of
importance, and if we can give, secretly, a Masonic character
to the peace we perhaps shall succeed in guaranteeing it from
attack in the future since you know, dear brother, that England
and the United States are the two countries in which the
Masonic institution has most respect and weight."®®

According to a letter received by Aguinaldo from La Patria, the
newspaper was established, apparently with the approval of the
American General, Otis, "to inaugurate a frank campaign against the
annexationist sentiment" being advanced by two other Masonic
dailies. The writer, Aurelio Tolentino, said he had formed an
association with seven people, "and indeed we told General Otis of it
through Mr. Pierce, a Protestant clergyman in the confidence of said
General . . .The General approved our political plan and, as a result,
we published our first number on the 16th of September last."®^

214

The letter continued by noting that Tolentino and some colleagues
had founded "Patria" Masonic Lodge, "to which no one opposed to
autonomy belongs in spite of some having applied for admission."
The object of his group, he said, is to work for his government and to
"better consolidate the laws of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity."®^

The references to "Senor Otis" and "General Otis" suggests that
the man belonged to the Masonic Fraternity. Although the General is
not further identified in the War Department report. General Elwell S.
Otis was at the time CJ.S. Army Commander in the Philippines, and
Director of Civil Government.®^ Also, Harrison Gray Otis, owner and
publisher of The Los Angeles Times, served as a Brigadier General in
the Philippines during the Spanish American War.®'^

Of the two, it would seem that Major General Elwell S. Otis, as
head of Civil Government, would have been the General most closely
involved in authorizing the establishment of a newspaper in the
Islands.

As for Aguinaldo, he and other Masons organized the Triagle
Magdole which later became the Magdolo Lodge. The proclamation of
the first Philippine Republic took place on the porch of Aguinaldo's
home, an edifice which also served as the Magdolo Lodge.®®

in January, 1955, Aguinaldo said: "it cannot be denied that the
Filipino Revolution against Spain was the work and glory of
Freemasonry in the Philippines."®®

Masons also were "instrumental in working for the grant of
Philippine independence by the United States."®^

Additional evidence of Masonic influence in the Philippines
surfaced following World War 11.

First, shortly after the War's close. Federal Reserve regulations
prohibited organizations and individuals from sending abroad more
than $500. However, in response to pressure exerted by General
Douglas MacArthur (a prominent Freemason), the Federal Reserve
Bank of Richmond, Virginia, authorized Grand Commander John
Cowles of the Scottish Rite's Southern Jurisdiction to send $5,000 to
the Philippines to rebuild and restore Masonic property. Shortly
thereafter, the Federal Reserve authorized another $15,000 to be sent
by Masons to the Islands, followed by another $100,000 sent by the
Brethren in California.®®

Secondly, the Craft was successful in amending legislation
designed to rehabilitate property of churches and other religious
organizations lost or damaged due to the War, so that it covered
Masonic property. The Masonic amendment added the words "any
corporation or sociedad anonima" (i.e., secret society) organized

215

pursuant to the laws in effect in the Philippine Islands at the time of its
organization.

As a result of that legislation (Public Law 79-370), eighty percent
of the cost of repairs for Scottish Rite Temples in the Philippines was
underwritten by CJ.S. taxpayers.®®

Interestingly enough, in May, 1955, a claim for recovery of World
War 11 loss and damage to Catholic property in the Philippines was
disallowed.^®

Finally, it should be noted that one Philippine statesman made
known his serious reservations about demands the Fraternity imposes
upon its initiates.

Brother Manuel Quezon, former President of the Philippine
Commonwealth, although selected for advancement to the 33rd
Degree, declined the dubious honor, because "he feared some way,
sometime, that there might be some obligation in accepting the honor
which would be in conflict with his allegiance to the Philippines."^^

Masonry And World War I

Some sources attribute World War 1 to Masonic intrigue. However,
according to a New Age editorial, the War was precipitated by a
"secret treaty" between the Vatican and Serbia, which would have
annexed Serbia to the Vatican State and imposed canon law on that
non-Catholic country. When the treaty became known, the editorial
continued. Archduke Franz Ferdinand, "Roman Catholic heir to the
Austro-Hungarian throne [and] known to be a secret party to the
policy embodied in the treaty," was assassinated by Gavrilo
Princep.^^

Not mentioned by the Scottish Rite journal was the fact that the
alleged assassins of the Archduke were members of the "Black
Hand," a South Slav revolutionary organization which was an offspring
of Freemasonry.^®

During the Trial, Princep testified that his colleague, Ciganovitch,
"told me he was a Freemason," and, on another occasion, "told me
that the Heir Apparent [Franz Ferdinand] had been condemned to
death by a Freemason's lodge.

Moreover, another of the accused assassins, Chabrinovitch,
testified that Major Tankositch, one of the plotters, was a
Freemason.^®

216

Communism And Freemasonry

The legacy of World War 1 was the Russian Revolution and the
scourge of International Communism, both of which had Masonic
influence.

James H. Billington, in his penetrating treatise on the history of
modern revolution, documents the intimate ties between
Freemasonry, llluminism and modern revolutions. Of Freemasonry
he says:

"So great, indeed, was the general impact of Freemasonry
in the revolutionary era that some understanding of the
Masonic milieu seems an essential starting point for any
serious inquiry into the occult roots of the revolutionary
tradition."^®

Billington notes that the "masonic lodges of Geneva provided the
ambiance" in which the early 19th Century revolutionary, Filippo
Giuseppe Buonarotti--the "first apostle of modern communism"--
formulated "his first full blueprint for a new society of revolutionary
republicans: the Sublime and Perfect Masters." Both the society's
name and the three levels of membership proposed for it "had been
adopted from Masonry."^^

The New Age observed that after 1825, many Russian Masons
exiled themselves to France, where lodges operating in the Russian
language were sponsored by the Grand Orient. Some of the exiles
later returned to Russia, and organized lodges in St. Petersburg and
Moscow. Later, additional lodges were organized in the early 20th
Century and had "an avowedly political aim and view; namely, that of
the overthrow of the autocracy."^®

The Scottish Rite monthly added: "The first Revolution in March,
1917 is said to have been inspired and operated from these lodges
and all the members of Kerenski's government belonged to them."^®

The Craft And Spanish Communism

The Craft's empathy with Communism was evident in Spain, in
1927 fraternal relations were "resumed between the Cl.S.S.R. and the
Spanish Scottish Rite."®®

Four years later. King Alfonso Xll was forced into exile, and
Masons, Communists, Socialists and Anarchists came into power. The

217

Catholic Church was disestablished, and education was secularized.
In June, 1931, the "Bulletin" of the Supreme Council of the Scottish
Rite in Spain boasted:

"The new republic . . .was the perfect image molded by
the gentle hands of our doctrines and principles. There will not
be effected another phenomenon of a political revolution
more perfectly Masonic than the Spanish one."®^

By 1933 a conservative reaction had set in, but the Marxist-
Masonic group returned to power and governed from 1935 to 1939,
when they were toppled, precipitating the Spanish Civil War.

With the ouster of the Marxists-Masons, the New Age pleaded
repeatedly for Americans to support the Spanish "Loyalists"
(Marxists-Masons). People were urged to write their Congressmen to
repeal legislation passed in 1937 which embargoed shipments of
munitions and war materials to the Marxist government of Spain.

In February, 1939, the New Age called attention to meetings of two
groups in Washington, D.C. which took opposite positions on aiding
the Masonic-supported Marxists in Spain.

One group was the National Conference To Lift The Embargo
Against Republican Spain. The other, the Keep The Embargo
Committee, was supported by Monsignor [later Archbishop] Fulton J.
Sheen, notable Catholic orator, author, and authority on Communism.

In his address at Constitution Hall before Keep The Embargo
Committee supporters, Msgr. Sheen identified the Loyalists as "Red
Spain," and urged "all those who believe in freedom, democracy and
religion to join in a protest against the 'Reds' supporting the Loyalist
cause in this country."®®

The pro-Loyalists met at the Masonic Almas Shrine Temple.
Included among the speakers at that rally were Lieutenant Colonel
John Gates, representing Friends of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade,
and Herbert Biberman, motion picture director.®'^

(Interestingly, several years later, the New Age published a list of
organizations considered by the Attorney General of the CJnited States
as "subversive" to the national security interests of America. Included
in the list was the Abraham Lincoln Brigade, which was cited as a
Communist Party front organization.)®®

The Scottish Rite monthly Journal also noted that Spain's
Nationalist Army of 1936-1939 "marched to war singing the battle
song of Rafael del Riego, an unsuccessful revolutionary (and a
Mason)."®®

218

The Masonic publication also said five cabinet members of the
Loyalist government were Masons, as were five leading generals.
However, a British history of the Spanish Civil War suggested that all
the General officers of the Loyalist Army were Masons.®^

Communist China And Masonry

In 1925, the New Age reported that a Chinese secret society
(tong) had "pretended" to be Masonic in 1903-1904, in order to secure
protection of American Masons, which was forthcoming. However, the
real object of the tong was to overthrow the Manchu dynasty.®®

That report was clarified some years later when it was explained
that the Hoon Bong, or Red Society of China, had been founded by
Hoong Hsieu Chuan, some of whose "educators were Masons." And "
[ajided by such friends, Hoong formed a secret society to oppose the
then ruling Manchu Dynasty . . .

"The Hoon Bong contributed materially to the overthrow of the
Manchu Dynasty . . ."®®

Prior to World War II, Masons had praised militant Chinese
Communist leader, Chou En Lai, who was extolled as the person
largely responsible for negotiating the Sian Agreement of 1936, which
terminated the Chinese civil war.

A Masonic writer said the Agreement "indicates that the Red Army
of China represented an agrarian movement based on a patriotically
inspired program ... If from this war emerges a real democracy for
China, there will be no occasion for the old Red Army to again come
to life as such. It can be merged into a government that believes in
fair representation of all classes, and is in that process now."®®

More direct American identification with Chinese Masonry
occurred in 1943 when John Stewart Service instituted the Fortitude
Lodge at Chunking.®^

Mr. Service was a diplomatic adviser to General Joseph Stilwell
and General Albert Wedemeyer in China during World War II.
Commenting on that situation, journalist M. Stanton Evans has written:

"In that position he [Service] maintained a running fire of
criticism against America's only ally, Chiang Kai-shek,
contrasting his 'Kuomintang' regime unfavorably with that of
the Chinese Communists."®^

On June 7, 1945, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)

219

arrested Service and five others for alleged violation of the Espionage
Act. However, he was not indicted, although in 1951, the Cl.S. Civil
Service Commission's Loyalty Review Board found "there is
reasonable doubt as to his loyalty," and he should be "forthwith
removed from the rolls of the Department of State.Nevertheless,
Service remained with the Department until his resignation in August,
1962.

Masonry, Communism And The Catholic

Church

In 1948, Grand Commander John Cowles said religion "is freer in
Russia today than it is in Roman Catholic Spain.

By 1950, the Scottish Rite feared the Catholic Church would
"capture the Clnited States" and turn it against Russia. This grandiose
plan supposedly was to be accomplished by using the Cl.S.
government and its resources "to annihilate Russia and Russian
opposition to the Pope."^^

During the years immediately following World War 11, the Scottish
Rite Masons repeatedly insisted that the Catholic Church is far more
dangerous than Soviet Communism.

Catholicism, not Communism nor Socialism, is Masonry's
immediate worry, the New Age said.^®

"How much longer are the free peoples of the Western World going
to submit to resistance being confined to Russia, while they lift neither
voice nor fist to strike the even more insidious force of the Vatican
Church-State?" a New Age editorial asked.

Minimization of the threat of Communism and magnification of an
alleged threat posed by the Catholic Church was a consistent theme
of the New Age during the mid-1950s.®®

Freemasonry, Nazism And Fascism

The unremitting antagonism of the Scottish Rite toward the Roman
Catholic Church is well documented. Therefore, it is surprising to find
the official publication of that Rite testifying to the Church's early
opposition to Hitler, at a time when the Craft itself was currying favor
with the Nazis.

In 1931, the New Age reported: "the Hitlerites are facing stiff

220

opposition from a newly organized group headed by five leading
bishops of the Roman Catholic hierarchy in Germany."®®

Continuing, the article said:

"The anti-Fascist stand on the part of the Catholic Church
was first asserted by the Bishops of Bavaria and Silesia, who
in official statements virtually excluded members of the
Nationalist Socialist Party from the church. At the present
time, [other Catholic bishops] have succeeded in virtually
lining up the entire Catholic population of the republic against
the Hitlerites.

"In a statement, the Bishops charge the Fascist! with
preaching hatred and racial religion . . ."

Some pages later, an editorial criticized the bishops for "engaging
in politics."^®®

Eight years later, the New Age found that when the Nazi revolution
came to Germany, Albert Einstein looked first to the universities, then
to editors of newspapers, and to individual journalists to speak out
against Hitler's engulfing tyranny. But his efforts were in vain,
because those elements in German society were silenced. Einstein
added:

"Only the Church stood squarely across the path of Hitler's
campaign for the suppression of truth . . . [Tjhe Church alone
has had the courage and persistence to stand for intellectual
truth and moral freedom." ^®^

In efforts to curry favor with Hitler, one Mason wrote in the New
Age: "I do not belong to Hitler, as I do not know his opinion about
Masons, but he seems to be an honest man and therefore his
movement has become strong. It is not the intention of the Hitlerites to
expel the Jews. We have Jewish families in Germany who came with
the Romans and settled here peacefully for centuries . . .the Hitlerites
are opposed to the lower class elements which have immigrated here
from foreign countries, importing Bolshevistic ideas . . ."i®2

In 1933, various German Masonic lodges changed their names, in
an effort to avoid being closed down by Hitler. Also, many lodges
broke relationship with foreign Masonic groups to demonstrate their
German nationalism and to indicate they were merely fraternal
organizations. ^ ®^

Commenting on the situation. The New York Times noted that

221

German Masonic lodges were adopting Christian names. One called
itself the National Christian Order of Frederick the Great, which
prompted the Times to editorialize: "Neither Frederick nor his close
chums Voltaire and Catherine of Russia have hitherto figured as
conspicuous Christians."

German Masonry also was "pleading for the admission of its
members to the Nazi Party." By-laws of the Fraternity were changed
to stipulate: "This order professes a German Christianity which has
much in common with the primitive sun worship. The order's symbols
are the sun and the cross.

Eligibility for membership in German Masonry became limited to
those Christians who could prove pure Teutonic descent for three
generations.

But the Nazis were not the only subjects of Masonic sychophancy.
The New Age discloses:

"Masons adhered to Fascism at the beginning and even
contributed toward the march on Rome. Freemasonry,
officially, was never hostile to Fascism until II Duce,
influenced by the Vatican, prepared a bill against secret
societies, forgetting to include in it the Society of Jesus, which
is the most secret society in the world." (Emphasis in
original).

By 1934, Masonry's efforts to temporize with the Nazis had proved
unsuccessful. Acting on Hitler's orders, Hermann Goering dissolved
all the lodges, including those which purported to be Christian.^®®
Although the New Age had been somewhat ambivalent about the
war against the Axis Powers prior to 1939, its militancy on the issue
galvanized after the Duke of Kent, brother of the reigning king, George
VI, was selected as the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of England
in 1939. That action by the English Masons continued an unbroken
tradition of intimate association between Freemasonry and English
royalty that goes back to 1737.^®®

By late summer, 1940, the New Age became a strong advocate of
G.S. involvement in the war, at first urging direct aid to England, but
later pressing for direct American entry into the war.^

An editorial called the Brotherhood to "rally to the support of
England, not alone because that country is the last stronghold of
Freemasonry in Europe . . ." The editorial said the "enemies" of the
Craft "would have reason to respect the military power its influence
could marshal in this country," if it chose to do so. ^ ^ ^

222

Nevertheless, the American people were strongly opposed to
sending their youth to fight on foreign soil. The strong division of
opinion on the subject was evident by the one-vote margin with which
the House approved legislation in September, 1940, calling for a
military draft. And by the summer of 1941, the first draftees were
chanting "OHIO," meaning: "Over the Hill in October"--or a massive
flight from military service once the troops had served one year of
compulsory military duty.

As the public sentiment became increasingly divided on
involvement in Europe, the New Age continued to press for Cl.S. entry
into the War. Finally, the issue was settled when the Japanese bombed
Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941.

Meanwhile in Europe, the Masonic Brotherhood continued to
operate in "secret circles in the private security of locked homes to
carry on their Masonic work," according to Brother Meyer
Mendelsohn, a French refugee who emigrated to the Clnited States.^

Brother Mendelsohn's statement was confirmed and elaborated
upon in an unusually candid and lengthy letter written on October 1,
1945 by a German Mason to the Commanding General, Headquarters,
Cl.S. Forces European Theatre, in connection with a request that
Freemasons be legally permitted to assemble.

Masonry's Political Orientation Confirmed

The writer of the letter, Wilfrid Schick, a resident of Munich and
"speaker for my comrades," urged the European Commander to
reopen the Symbolische Grossloge von Deutschland, which he
characterized as a philosophical lodge organized on an international
basis to serve "the idea of the general world chain."

Herr Schick told how Lodge members during the War used
"appropriate manoeuvres" and "skillful tactics of the freemasons" to
destroy or otherwise secure all Craft documents relating to
membership and operation of the Grand Lodge. Those tactics, he
said, destroyed the "outward organization" of the Grand Lodge, while
allowing the Brotherhood to work in the "smallest circles" to carry on
a "quiet, permanent struggle" against "the power of suppression."^

The Bavarian Mason asked that the CJ.S. military officials utilize
the civilian radio network to help him in locating other German
Masons.^

Confirming that Masonry avoids all conventional religious beliefs.
Brother Schick also made it clear that Masonry's interest in

223

"education" extends far beyond formal schooling at elementary
through university levels. Such "education" also includes the
inculcation of Masonic philosophy into political party doctrines.

In that regard, he said the basic beliefs of "true freemasonry"
center on the "eternal, inborn rights of every individual . . .and the
avoiding of all dogmatic and intolerant bindings ..."

It was vital, he insisted, that Freemasonry be expanded in
Germany in order "to maintain the exclusivity." which is "absolutely
necessary to create . . .a highly qualified freemason leader class."

Every Freemason, he continued, must be granted the right to
participate in politics "without limitation" in order to "win influence on
the public life and on the governmental administration, with the
assistance of political parties."

Important to that effort, he stated, is the necessity to make "a
concentrated penetration of. . .party doctrines with freemason ideas."

The "real sphere" of the Lodge, he added, is "to fulfill an
educational mission."^

The Bavarian Mason also confirmed that Masonry uses the same
deceptive techniques which were first revealed in connection with
Adam Weishaupt's Bavarian Illuminati.

Brother Schick said the Craft must propagate the ideas of world
Freemasonry by using "a number of institutions for education." Such
institutions, he continued, "will have to be created as the first
elements to the real lodges." He proposed, as did Weishaupt, that the
institutions be "in the form of societies for politics, economic politics,
for art and sciences, etc." Those types of "institutions," he observed,
would appeal to the best class of people, including youth.^^^

Schick confirmed that the Catholic Church is a particular
obstruction to Masonry's success. He said, in the "occidental cultural
sphere [i.e., Europe, North and South America] only the Catholic
Church" stands as an opponent of Freemasonry, by appealing to the
"dogma-bound" people, while Masonry appeals to the "dogma-
less."^^®

The Bavarian Craftsman made it clear that Freemasonry's
principles of "love of the mother-country and duties as a citizen" must
never be wrongly understood. "Superordinated to all," he insisted, "is
the duty . . .towards the all-uniting community of fellow-freemasons of
the democratic world."

Finally, Brother Schick insisted that any attack on the "natural
rights of humanity" by "the schools of religion or political dogmatists"
must never be tolerated, but rather strongly "opposed . . .with active
fighting . . ."^20

224

G.S. Military Opposes Masonry

Herr Schick had to wait two months for a reply from the military
commandant. Finally, on December 10, 1945, he was notified that
Freemasonry could not be reactivated, because the Intelligence
Division (G-2) found Freemasonry to be "a secret organization and . .
■their meetings should be prohibited."

The question of revival of the German Masonic Order was raised
again by General Lucius Clay, Commander of the Office of Military
Government, in a message to General Joseph McNarney,
Commander of the European Forces. McNarney replied by secret
cable: "Policy this headquarters is to prohibit application of German
Masonic Order at this time. Previous application for permission to
reestablish was unfavorably considered . . . Decision based on the
grounds that the Masonic Order is a secret organization and also on
the uncertain security situation.

A memorandum by the legal division of the Office of Military
Government (OMG), Germany, dated April 1, 1946, noted that
members of the Hohenzollern family were Freemasons and that the
Craft had "flourished" under the Weimar Republic. Under the Nazis,
the memorandum said, the lodges were viewed as "a centre of
international conspiracy to destroy Germany," and were, accordingly,
dissolved.

That memorandum served as a background document for another
memorandum written by General Clay to the War Department on
June 27, 1946 relative to a German-American Club in the G.S. Zone
known as the Cosmopolitan Club.

General Clay noted that the Club was dissolved because Prince
Louis Ferdinand, a grandson of Kaizer Wilhelm of the Hohenzollern
family, was a close friend of Captain Merle A. Potter, director of
Military Government at Bad Kissingen, who also was the organizer
and president of the Club.

Prior to his World War II service. Potter had been a movie critic for
the Minneapolis Journal for 17 years. He described the Club as a
Kiwanis-type organization, and said no discussion of politics was
permitted during Club meetings. The organization reportedly was
comprised of professional men and business executives.

However, Potter was reassigned following dissolution of the
Cosmopolitan Club, "because of the poor judgment exercised by
Captain Potter in having Louis Ferdinand as a member of the Club
and his personal friend."

The memorandum added: "We fully recognize that the association

225

of a Military Government Officer with a member of the Hohenzollern
family will be misunderstood at home, in Germany, and by our
allies.

On July 3, 1946, Major General H. R. Bull, Chief of Staff, CJ.S.
Forces European Theatre, informed Clay that he (Bull) and General
McNarney were concerned about security problems associated with
secret social organizations. At the same time, he said "penetrating"
such groups by Counter-intelligence Corps (GIG) agents "would be of
doubtful practicable" value. Nevertheless, the Chief of Staff was
concerned about the secret social clubs, because fraternizing under
"the cloak of secrecy . . .might well be abused." Accordingly, General
Bull said he and General McNarney recommended that any directive
allowing meetings of social groups and secret societies be "deferred
indefinitely.

Masonry Wins Again

However, despite that recommendation, the Allied Military
Government for Germany approved reactivation of the German Grand
Lodge of Freemasonry on July 23, 1947.^^®

By October, 1947, Captain Potter had been promoted to Major, and
became adviser to the Chief of Staff on American-German relations.

On October 8, Potter wrote a letter to the Military Government of
Germany reporting on a conference which had taken place
September 23-27, 1947, which was attended by twelve American-
German Social Discussion Clubs. A summary of the minutes of that
conference showed that those attending had discussed formation of a
United States of Europe. The topic was characterized as "a subject of
outstanding discussion.

The conference mentioned by Major Potter appeared to be
uncannily similar to Herr Schick's proposal for establishing
"institutions for education" in Masonic philosophy, such as "societies
for politics, economic politics, for art and sciences, etc."

in that regard, the idea of a United States of Europe, and the
concept that Masonry "had no nationality" was advanced in the
French lodges.

As a matter of fact, early in the War years. Masonic spokesmen
had viewed World War 11 as a turning point for the Fraternity, and
spoke of the "world government" expected to be established at the
conclusion of the War to help usher in a "newer phase of evolutionary
progress.

226

A Czech Mason said the struggle for the freedom of man began
with the American and French Revolutions, and World War 11 "is the
climax of a world ideological struggle which started at the end of the
18th Century. It is the struggle of the New Age against the Middle

Age. "130

Masonry In Japan

Meanwhile, on the other side of the world. Masonry had gotten off
to a rather slow start.

In 1893, Japanese law empowered police to attend and
superintend any organized group meeting, and to break up any such
gatherings if the police determined there was any reason for doing so.
Secret meetings were prohibited.

Because of that situation, Scottish Rite Masons in Japan contacted
the Grand Commander in Washington, D.C. and urged him to explain
the situation to the President of the United States and the Secretary of
State. Apparently that was done, and Japanese law was not enforced
against Cl.S. Scottish Rite Masons.

However, in 1936, the Japanese Government became alarmed at
what it called the "mysterious world organization" known as
Freemasons, and "secretly investigated the Craft."i32

The concern was not surprising. At that time, the Masonic "Club"
of Kobe, Japan, had been in existence for 65 years as the Japanese
branch of Freemasonry. It was viewed as "a secret society of Judea
which has been picturing a phantasm of a mysterious world."
Branches of the "Club" were located in Kobe, Yokahama, Tokyo, and

in Korea. 133

The Kobe Masonic Club had come into existence in strict privacy.
The Club was made up of several lodges, such as the Rising Sun
Lodge, and the Lodge Hyogo and Osaka (Scottish). Most of the
leading foreign residents from England, America, France,
Switzerland, Sweden and Denmark "secretly affiliated themselves
with the Club," which had as a "principal object [to] bring about a

world revolution. "134

In October, 1942, the New Age ran an article by one of 10
Freemasons who had returned to the United States from Japan. The
anonymous author of the article told of the thoroughness with which
the Japanese Government investigated Freemasonry. "Nothing has
been left undone or unseen by them within the capabilities of those in
charge," he said.

227

It was also noted that "the innermost secrets of the confidential
files" of the Craft in Japan were taken by the government authorities.
Concluding, the article stated:

" . . .it behooves all of us first to gain victory and then to
bear in mind the significance of that great legend so well
known--Ordo Ab Chao."^^^

The words "Ordo Ab Chao" mean Order From Chaos, and are the
motto of the Scottish Rite's 33rd degree.

A book titled. On The World-Wide Secret Society, written by Jiro
Imai, assistant professor of literature at Tokyo Imperial CJniversity,
said that Freemasonry "was a most dangerous and subversive secret
society." in reply. Dr. Sazkuzo Yoshino wrote that "the League of
Nations was created with the genuine spirit of Freemasonry."^^®

Nevertheless, the International Rotary Club of Japan "was ordered
dissolved as an outer organ of Freemasonry." Also, Rotarians faced
charges by Army officers that the organization had received secret
orders for the destruction of the country, and was sending information
to their enemies. The Japanese Rotarians were further accused of
conspiring with Freemasonry against Japan's national policies.

Boy Scouts, too, were declared an arm of Freemasonry.

However, the status of Masons, Rotarians and Boy Scouts was
changed dramatically with the defeat of Japan in World War 11.

General Douglas MacArthur, Supreme Commander in Japan,
informed George M. Saunders, 33rd Degree, Imperial Recorder of the
Shrine of North America, that the Occupational Government under
MacArthur was molded on the precepts of Freemasonry.^^®

The five-star General recommended to the Masonic Supreme
Council that his aide. Major Michael Rivisto, be named deputy in
Japan. And so it was done: Rivisto became the first Master of the
Tokyo Lodge.

Count Tsuneo Matsudaira, former President of the Japanese House
of Councillors, said he knew Masonry very well. He added: "Japanese
misunderstanding and prejudice toward Freemasonry was one of the
main causes of the last war."

The Japanese official said further that Freemasonry "will
undoubtedly be a social revolution in Japan."

One member of the Fraternity, after noting that General MacArthur,
a 33rd Degree Mason, had reopened Masonic lodges in Japan,
commented:

228

"Most of the Generals of the Occupation and many men of
lesser rank who were in key positions were Masons. The
Japanese have since concluded that Masonry had some
connection with the success of the Occupation.

Moreover, the Sovereign Grand Commander of the Scottish Rite
pointed out that all except one successor to General MacArthur as Far
East Commander were "all active masons and members of the
Scottish Rite." Those officers were Generals Matthew Ridgeway, Mark
Clark, John Hull and Lyman Lemnitzer.^"^^

229

PART IV

TARGETING MEN FOR THE
FRATERNITY

230

11/ HOW IT'S DONE

Some men gravitate naturally to Freemasonry because of its
Gnosticism and commitment to revolution, but the vast majority are
attracted to the Fraternity by its external glitter.

The Lure

The following item in The New York Times typifies the favorable
publicity which surrounds meetings of the Shriners--the so-called
"fun-loving" adjunct of Masonry, which is open only to men who are
Knights Templar or who have received the 32nd degree in a Scottish
Rite consistory.

KANSAS CITY, MO, July 5 (CIPl)--Arab sheiks swished in
flowing robes. Keystone Kops cavorted on tricycle-sized
motor scooters, the cavalry chased the Indians, trumpeters
tooted, horses pranced and motorcycles chugged--craziness
prevailed on the downtown streets today. ^

The Shriners are well known for their ability to evoke laughter and
spread happiness among young and old. They also are universally
admired and respected for sponsoring hospitals which specialize in
caring for children.

My own experience at a 1965 Shriner's parade in Washington,
D.C. left my wife and me so impressed by the Arab sheiks. Keystone
Kops, marching bands, clowns and choirs--and the immense joy and
pleasure they all brought to our small children--that we were strongly
persuaded to believe the Catholic Church's age-old condemnation of
the Masonic Fraternity must certainly be misguided.

Consequently, it was shocking later to learn that behind the festive
facade and the children's charities lurked a more profoundly selfish
purpose. Adam Weishaupt suggested the reason for such activities
nearly 200 years ago when he instructed his llluminees:

"We must win the common people in every corner. This
will be obtained chiefly by means of the schools, and by open.

231

hearty behaviour. Show condescension, popularity, and
toleration of their prejudices, which we, at leisure, shall root
out and dispel."^

In 1945, a member of the Craft put it this way: "The major job of
the Masonic Fraternity is the creation of a healthy and enlightened
public opinion." And, he added: All other Masonic activities are
"incidental" to the real purpose of Freemasonry, which is "the creation
and maintenance of a public opinion that will sustain the kind of world
that we all wish to live in."^

Public relations activities are the life-blood of Masonry, because
the Craft's policy ostensibly forbids extending invitations to join the
Fraternity. Rather, men who are attracted to the Craft must themselves
request entry into the Lodge. This claim is often true, but it is well
known that the Fraternity frequently expends considerable effort to
invite persons of rank and distinction to accept entrance into the
Secret Brotherhood. Two such trophies bagged by the Brotherhood
were President William Howard Taft, and General Douglas MacArthur.
They are typical examples of prominent individuals who were made
Masons "by sight"; that is, they did not request entry into the
Fraternity; the Brotherhood imposed itself upon them, and elicited
their consent to be identified with the Craft.

In 1968, the Scottish Rite Grand Commander clearly explained the
technique for luring men into the Fraternity. He said Masons are
"bound by age-old policies and traditions to refrain from inviting or
making a direct appeal to individuals to apply for membership." So, to
incite a desire to join the Craft, the Brotherhood must attract attention
to the organization "in such a way" that the profane will initiate
inquiries "as to how they might. . .become Masons."

Continuing, the Masonic chieftan said that "tact, diplomacy, and
skillful salesmanship will bring opportunities." In that regard, he
mentioned a Masonic film, "In The Hearts Of Men," which had
impressed many profane (i.e., non-Masons) by the number of
"distinguished Americans [who] were Masons." Commenting further,
the Grand Commander said:

"Crippled children's hospitals throughout the country, and
the knowledge that Masons are largely responsible for them,
has induced many outsiders to petition for the degrees of
Masonry. The same can be said about education programs of
the Supreme Council in support of the public schools and
Americanism.'"^

232

And he added: "It comes down to this: Responsible citizens of the
CJnited States want to help causes and institutions that are unselfishly
working for the good of our country and humanity."

Pressing home the need for luring men into the Fraternity, the
Commander said the Brethren must be "recognized as strong
advocates of Masonic participation" in such publicly accepted entities
"as public schools, scouting, youth organizations, YMCA, Salvation
Army, and libraries."^

Albert Pike placed in perspective how the Fraternity uses Masons
who are nationally prominent public figures. He wrote: "Masons do not
build monuments to [George] Washington, and plume themselves on
the fact that he was a Mason merely on account of his Masonic
virtues. It is because his civic reputation sheds glory upon the
Order."6

Professor Renner, one of the Marianen Academy scholars who
gave a written deposition about his knowledge of the Illuminati, said
that the Order bound adepts by subduing their minds "with the most
magnificent promises, and assured . . .the protection of great
personages ready to do everything for the advancement of its
members at the recommendation of the Order.

Moreover, the professor said, the Order (which, incidentally, has
much in common with modern Freemasonry) enticed into its lodges
only those who could be useful: "Statesmen . . .counsellors,
secretaries . . .professors, abbes, preceptors, physicians, and
apothecaries are always welcome candidates to the Order."®

Although the Craft popularized the phrase, "Brotherhood of Man
Cinder the Fatherhood of God," in reality. Freemasonry "was never
intended for the multitude."®

Masons who believe the Craft is a "social and fraternal order" are
operating under an "erroneous impression," and become "a distinct
liability" to the Fraternity.^®

It is truly surprising that thousands of men are lured into joining an
organization about which they know almost nothing. Advertising
experts call it "selling the sizzle and not the steak."

A 1950 New Age editorial remarked on the phenomenon by
observing that the applicant for membership in the Craft "does not
know in advance the vows he must take or the principles to which he
will pledge allegiance. Yet, in spite of such a handicap, hundreds of
persons every year make application to Join a Masonic Lodge.

Why do they do so? The editorial explains that the major reason is
because a man's acquaintances and friends are members of the
Fraternity, "and, if they have found Masonry in accordance with its

233

reputation for good in the community, then he feels justified in the
faith that nothing will be asked of him which could not be proclaimed
to the world with propriety." ^ ^

But the editorial did not find it necessary to report that, once
inside, the initiates are bound by solemn oaths, and stern promises of
mutilation and death if they reveal Masonic secrets. However, even if
the Brotherhood's secrets are revealed, they are dismissed as untrue
by the general public, because so many honorable men are
associated with the Fraternity.

But what are the Fraternity's secrets? Why must members bind
themselves so solemnly and agree to accept mutilation and death if
the secrets are revealed? If the organization is simply fraternal,
charitable and dedicated to good works, surely such extreme
measures are totally uncalled for.

The obvious conclusion is that the Secret Brotherhood is hiding
something so serious that decent men would never join it if they were
fully informed in advance of its activities and purposes.

Targeting The Candidates

Masons obviously are very choosy about who makes up the
"Brotherhood of Man" in the lodge rooms across the world. Craft
leaders insist that it is "very important" for its investigating
committees to scrutinize those who seek admission into the Fraternity.
It is particularly important to determine the "religious views" of the
candidates, as well as their "habits, associates, how they spend [their]
leisure time, and whether [they are] financially able to become a
Mason."^^

As part of the selection process, the candidate is personally
interviewed by the investigative committee in the presence of his
wife, in order to "ascertain that the financial condition of the family is
such" that the man will be able to pay dues to the Craft without
financial strain.

Masonic investigating committees check references provided by
the candidate, and make inquiries of his co-workers. Moreover,
Brothers who work in government law-enforcement agencies are
contacted, and usually "are extremely cooperative."^^

The Brotherhood's own investigating agency is known as the
Masonic Relief Association [MRA], "a great agency for information
concerning all types of investigations of the character of individuals
seeking the good offices of the Fraternity, and all that is necessary is

234

to make use of it. . .

m16

The Binding Oaths

Once the candidate has been lured or targeted, he is formally
initiated into the Fraternity amid occult signs and symbols of the
Mystery Religions and, incongruously, the Holy Bible. The candidate
for the Apprentice Degree, by direction, sinks to the floor on his bared
left knee, his right knee forming the angle of a square. His left hand
holds the Bible, square and compass, and his right hand rests on
those Masonic symbols. Now the candidate proclaims in a loud voice
before the Master of the Lodge and the assembled Brethren:

"1, _, of my own free will and accord, in the

presence of Almighty God, and this Worshipful Lodge, erected
to Him, and dedicated to the holy Saints John, do hereby and
hereon most solemnly and sincerely promise and swear, that 1
will always hail, ever conceal, and never reveal any of the
arts, parts, or points of the hidden mysteries of Ancient Free
Masonry, which may have been, or hereafter shall be, at this
time, or any future period, communicated to me, as such, to
any person or persons whomsoever, except it be to a true and
lawful brother Mason, or in a regularly constituted Lodge of
Masons; nor unto them until, by strict trial, due examination,
or lawful information, 1 shall have found him, or them, as
lawfully entitled to the same as 1 am myself. 1 furthermore
promise and swear that 1 will not print, paint, stamp, stain, cut,
carve, mark or engrave them, or cause the same to be done,
on any thing movable or immovable, capable of receiving the
least impression of a word, syllable, letter, or character,
whereby the same may become legible or intelligible to any
person under the canopy of heaven, and the secrets of
Masonry thereby unlawfully obtained through my
unworthiness.

"All this 1 most solemnly promise and swear, with a firm
and steadfast resolution to perform the same, without any
mental reservation or secret evasion of mind whatever,
binding myself under no less penalty than that of having my
throat cut across, my tongue torn out by its roots, and my
body buried in the rough sands of the sea, at low water mark,
where the tide ebbs and flows twice in twenty-four hours.

235

should I ever knowingly violate this my Entered Apprentice
obligation. So help me God, and keep me steadfast in the due
performance of the same."^^

More than 150 years ago, former President John Quincy Adams,
commenting on Freemasonry, said it was "vicious in its first step, the
initiation oath, obligation and penalty of the Entered Apprentice"
degree. He opposed the oaths because they: are extra-judicial and
contrary to the laws of the land; violate Christ's precept to "swear not
at all"; impose a commitment to keep undefined secrets unknown to
the person swearing the oath; impose a penalty of death for violation
of the oath; and prescribe a mode of death that is "cruel, unusual and
unfit for utterance from human lips."^®

The Entered Apprentice oath is, of course, the first of many oaths
Masons voluntarily agree to utter. Moreover, the punishments
threatened become increasingly severe as the initiate progresses
through the various degrees.

From the outset, the new Mason learns that almost none of the
Craft's teachings originated with Christianity, but rather in "China, four
thousand years ago," and in the "priesthood of ancient Egypt, and the
Jews of the Captivity."^®

Repeatedly, his attention is directed toward the Mystery Religions,
to the fact that early man "found God in nature," and he is told of the
ceremonies of ancient Egypt, the mysteries of Eleusis, and the rites of
Mithras.^®

The nascent Mason immediately learns that the Masonic attraction
for the feasts of St. John the Baptist (June 24) and St. John the
Evangelist (December 27) has nothing to do with Christianity, but
refers to the summer and winter pagan festivals of the sun.^^

He is subtly reminded to forget his early religious upbringing
because his initiation "is an analogy of man's advent from prenatal
darkness into the light of human fellowship, moral truth, and spiritual
faith." Masonic initiation, he is informed, is an "opportunity for
spiritual rebirth.

Again, the neophyte Mason is warned that he has become
affiliated with a strange organization which literally sets itself apart
from the rest of society. He is told the lodge "is a world unto itself; a
world within a world, different in its customs, its laws, and its structure
from the world without. .

One does not have to be elevated to the 32nd Degree to
understand that Masonry holds unique religious beliefs that are totally
contrary to conventional religion.

236

From pages 50 and 51 of his handbook, a thoughtful Apprentice
Mason will understand that Man is God. This is made clear as the
booklet develops the thought that beautiful stone statues are created
simply by knocking away with hammer and chisel the stone that is
not needed from the statue that was in the rock "all the time." He is
reminded: "The kingdom of heaven is within you," and man "is made
in the image of God." In the very next sentence the new Mason is
instructed to recall the analogy of the sculpted statue, which is
produced simply by "a process of taking away" to reveal the
"perfection . . .already within.

A moment's serious thought will tell the Apprentice Craftsman that
the Grand Architect who shapes the CJniverse is not God of the Old
and New Testaments, but MAN--"the perfect man and Mason," who,
until he was shaped from a "rough stone" to become a "perfect
stone," had concealed his image as God by the excrescences of
religious beliefs and familial and national loyalties. Heaven is not
above, it is within the Masonic man, who has the ability to create
Heaven on earth.

As he moves up the Masonic ladder, the candidate for the Second
(Fellow Craft) Degree makes the following commitment:

" . . .binding myself under no less penalty than of having
my breast torn open, my heart plucked out, and placed on the
highest pinnacle of the temple there to be devoured by the
vultures of the air, should I ever knowingly violate the Fellow
Craft obligation . .

In the Third Degree (Master Mason), the candidate is threatened--

" . . .under no less penalty than that of having my body
severed in two, my bowels taken from thence and burned to
ashes, the ashes scattered before the four winds of heaven,
that no more remembrance might be had of so vile and
wicked a wretch as I would be, should I ever knowingly violate
this my Master Mason's obligations . . .

The Master Elect of the Fifteen (Tenth Degree) says:

" . . .1 consent to have my body opened perpendicularly,
and to be exposed for eight hours in the open air, that the
venomous flies may eat of my entrails, my head to be cut off
and put on the highest pinnacle of the world, and I will always
be ready to inflict the same punishment on those who shall

237

disclose this degree and break this obligation . .

The Knight Kadosh (30th) Degree symbolizes the Fraternity's
raging battle against Church and State. The Grand Master approaches
a table on which are three skulls. One is adorned with a papal tiara, a
second wears a regal crown, and the third is festooned with a laurel
wreath. The Grand Master stabs the skull bearing the papal tiara, as
the candidate repeats: "Down with Imposture! Down with crime!" The
Master and the candidate then kneel before the skull adorned with the
laurel leaf and say: "Everlasting glory to the immortal martyr of
virtue." Passing to the crowned skull, the pair chant: "Down with
tyranny! Down with crime!"

The candidate takes a second oath to "strive unceasingly . . .for
the overthrow of superstition, fanaticism, imposture and intolerance."

He takes a third oath in which he accepts and consents "to
undergo the sentence which may be pronounced against me by this
dreaded tribunal, which I hereby acknowledge as my Supreme
Judge."

The fourth oath taken by a Knight Kadosh focuses again on the
"cruel and cowardly Pontiff, who sacrificed to his ambition the
illustrious order of those Knights Templar of whom we are the true
successors." Then all present trample upon the papal tiara, as they
shout: "Down with imposture."^®

In the 31st Degree, the candidate agrees that the Masonic ideal of
justice "is more lofty than the actualities of God."^®

The 32nd Degree teaches that "Masonry will eventually rule the
world. "30

Symbolism

Early in their service to the Craft, the Brethren learn that the art of
symbolism is crucial to carrying on the Fraternity's work in a profane
world. One Mason said all words used in Masonry are symbolic, and
the initiate must learn "the symbolic meaning of true religion . . .of
true philosophy, true morality and true brotherhood. "3 ^

Another Craftsman said a full understanding of Masonic symbols
"can only be obtained by a study of Eastern mysticism--Cabbalistic,
Pythagorean, and such. "32

In 1968 the Brotherhood was informed:

"The symbolism of Masonry has many shades of

238

interpretation which each Mason must evaluate for himself in
accordance with his own individual nature. Masonic rituals are
the 'idioms' of an ancient symbolic language, a language
which expresses ideas, more so than words. It is said that
seven magical keys conceal the innermost secrets of
Freemasonry within the volume of Sacred lore upon the
Masonic altar. These sacred truths are variously interpreted
by different individuals within the Lodge.

"... Each Mason on the journey of exploring life through
Masonic Ritual finds his Truth."

* * *

"The Freemason, the ritualist, is the all-inclusive
manipulator of nature's finer forces within himself.

"Freemasonry is much more than an exact ritual alone. It
is also an exact formula through which we together, but
differently, may be enabled to make progress, slowly but
surely . .

One authority on the Fraternity said symbolism attracts the
Masonic candidate and fascinates the initiated. It trains Masons to
consider the existing institutions--religious, political and social--as
passing phases of human evolution. It also allows the Craft to conceal
its real purposes.

Father Hermann Gruber noted that the Great Architect of the
Universe and the Bible are of utmost importance to the Brotherhood,
because symbols are explained and accepted by each Mason
according to his own understanding.

The official organ of Italian Masonry, for example, emphasized the
Great Architect as representing the revolutionary god of Mazzini, the
Satan of Carducci, god as the fountain of love, or Satan, the genius of
the good, not the bad. In reality, the German Jesuit observed, Italian
Masonry in those interpretations was adoring the principle of
Revolution.

Typical of that revolutionary orientation within Masonry are the
initials I.N.R.I. Inscribed on the Crucifix above Christ's head, they
mean to the Christian: Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews. But in
Masonic symbolism they stand for Igne Natura Renovator Integra--
Entire Nature Is Renovated By Fire.^®

It is important to note also that a substantial portion of Masonic
communication is passed from "mouth to ear." As one Craftsman
observed: "One of the principal avenues for keeping Masonry active

239

is the manner of instructing from mouth to ear, from generation to
generation.

Masonry And The Media

Masonry obviously wields enormous influence in world media.
Historian Mildred Headings said Masons influenced at least 47
periodicals throughout France, off and on, during the late 19th and
early 20th Centuries.^®

In the CJnited States, in 1920, the Scottish Rite established a news
service for "furnishing accurate and gratuitous information to
newspapers."®^

In 1924, the Grand Commander informed the Brethren: "Through
the activities of our state organizations, the New Age Magazine, our
clip service and News Bureau, we are stimulating the public interest
and furnishing much valuable material to speakers and writers, and
thereby can reasonably claim much credit" for the growing interest in
favor of compulsory education by the state.

Two years later, the Grand Commander was able to report to the
Brethren: "... it is safe to claim that the majority of daily publications
seem very friendly in their attitude toward the Craft.

It was not only small town newspapers which looked with approval
on the Fraternity's activities. The New Age reported that "many
members of the National Press Club are Masons, not a few of them
very prominent Masons.

Also it was noted that a number of Christian Science officials have
been Masons, and the Christian Science Monitor "devotes
considerable space to Masonic activities throughout the world.
Indeed, during the 1930s, the Monitor ran a regular column regarding
Freemasonry's routine activities.

Prominent Masons in the media included: Charles P. Taft, founder
and publisher of the Cincinnati Times Star;^"^ Roy W. Howard,
chairman of Scripps-Howard newspapers, CJnited Press, and
Newspaper Enterprise Association (NEA);''^® Ogden Reid, editor of the
New York Herald Tribune;"^® Richard H. Amberg, publisher of the St.
Louis Globe Democrat;"^^ and James G. Stahlman, president of the
Nashville Banner.''^®

In 1987, The Wall Street Journal published an editorial castigating
Senator Patrick Leahy (D., VT) for questioning Masonry's segregation
policies in connection with membership in the Fraternity by a

240

prospective judicial candidate, Judge David Sentelle. The editorial
stated:

"The problem is that Sen. Leahy's smoking gun is loaded
with blanks. One phone call would have told Sen. Leahy that
the Masons don't discriminate against blacks. The Masonic
Services Association in Washington, D.C., says membership
is open 'without regard to race, color or religion.' Blacks
founded their own lodges a century ago, but now many belong
to predominately white lodges, as Judge Sentelle said.

"The group also provides a membership list. This includes
George Washington, both Roosevelts, Harry Truman, a total of
15 of 40 presidents. Eight of nine Justices who signed Brown v.
Board of Education were Masons, including Earl Warren and
William Douglas. About 75 congressmen also belong,
including liberal Sens. Robert Byrd (W. Va. Mountain Lodge
No. 156), Mark Hatfield (Oregon Pacific Lodge No. 50) and
Arlen Specter (Pa. E. Coppe Mitchell Lodge No. 605).""'^®

The present author wrote a letter to the Journal the next day to say
the editorial was "wide of the mark." The letter continued by making
the following points:

"The fact is, a basic Masonic 'landmark' (which cannot be
repealed) stipulates that only men who are neither crippled,
slaves, nor born in slavery are eligible for membership in the
Masonic Fraternity. The latter criterion has excluded Negroes
from regular Masonry, and prompted them to form their own
'clandestine' branch, known as Prince Hall Masonry, to which
Justice Thurgood Marshall belongs."

The letter also noted that the Senator's challenge must be an
historic first, "or at least the first such legislative challenge to Masonic
philosophy since the early 19th century," when committees of the
legislatures of New York, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts found
Masonry to be a distinct threat to both government and religion.

It also was observed that similar findings have been published
over 200 times by various Popes beginning in 1738. Moreover, the
letter recalled that many other Christian denominations have similarly
indicted Freemasonry, as has Scotland Yard. In conclusion, the letter
said:

"Indeed, between 1941-1971, the Supreme Court was

241

dominated by Masons in ratios ranging from 5 to 4 (1941-
1946; 1969-1971) to 8 to 1 (1949-1956). During that 30-year-
period, the Court erected "a wall" separating things religious
from things secular. It was an epoch when prayer and Bible
reading were deracinated from public education and when
decision after decision succeeded in prohibiting any State
financial assistance to religious schools.

"Despite the facade of prominent national personalities
who are boasted of by the Craft, as well as parades, circuses
and hospitals. Masons have succeeded in having their religion
dominate American society."^®

Although the letter contained information that is little known to the
public at large, it was never published; however, its receipt at the
Journal was acknowledged privately to the writer.

Almost two months later. The Washington Times ran an "op-ed"
piece on the same subject, which argued in support of Masonry along
lines almost identical to the position set forth earlier by the Journal.
The article was written by a man named Blair Dormney, a
Washington, D.C. attorney and free-lance writer who was identified as
a non-Mason.^ ^

On the very day the article appeared, this writer sent a letter to the
editor of the Times to make (more briefly) the same points as were
made in response to the Journal's editorial. Again, although receipt of
the letter was acknowledged, it was never published.

Of course, editors are free to choose which letter to print, but it
seems strange that both the Journal and the Times base their
arguments largely on what a Masonic organization says about its own
Fraternity, and fail to report the known history of the Brotherhood or
facts set forth in counter arguments which are readily verifiable.

And so men are attracted to Masonry by its favorable public
image and by knowing they are Brothers with Presidents, statesmen,
justices. Congressmen, Senators, prime ministers, generals,
admirals, captains of industry, journalists and other shapers and
molders of history. Yet, some become disillusioned and separate
themselves from the Craft, only to find Masons often "retaliate against
members who quit by trying to get them fired from their jobs and
otherwise harassing them."^^ Several former members of the
Fraternity said they moved from their residences after leaving the
lodge, and some asked that their names not be used by newspaper
reporters because they feared reprisals.

242

One former Mason called attention to the oath of a Master Mason,
which says in part:

"1 furthermore promise and swear that 1 will not cheat,
wrong or defraud a Lodge of Master Masons, or a brother of
this degree . . .1 swear that 1 will not violate the chastity of a
Master Mason's wife, his mother, sister or daughter, knowing
them to be such ..."

Anokan Reed, a former top-level York Rite Mason, pointed to the
morality of such an oath by commenting: "it's OK to seduce another
man's daughter, or steal his car, as long as he's not a Master Mason . .
.in the higher degrees. Masons deny the reality of evil."^^

Reed, a former 13th Degree York Rite member, said he joined a
lodge in Kokomo, Indiana when he was in his 20s, because his boss,
a Mason, guaranteed he would "move up in the steel mill" if he joined.
After becoming a Mason, Reed was promoted to a supervisory
position for which, he admits, he was not qualified.^®

The former York Rite Mason moved from Kokomo to avoid
harassment after being expelled from the Fraternity for challenging
the Craft's secrecy.^^

Masonry And Politics

Writing of Freemasonry's dominance of the public life of France
during the Third Republic (1870-1940), historian Mildred Headings
said the Fraternity established a firm and determined policy that
nothing should occur in that country "without the hidden, secret
participation of Masonry."

With that goal in mind, the Craft made a concerted effort to have
as many Masons as possible in parliament, the ministries, and in
other official capacities. As a result, "the public power, the national
power [was] directed by Masons."^®

To demonstrate the political power of Masonry in France during
that period, Ms. Headings noted that in 1912, for example, 300 of the
580 members of the House of Deputies (52.7 percent) were
Freemasons, as were 180 of 300 Senators (60 percent.)^®

What of the Clnited States? The preceding pages of this book have
disclosed how Masonry dominated public policy in a number of
individual States, and, nationally, through the Nativist, Know-Nothing,
APA, and Ku Klux Klan Movements. But if Masonic dominance of the

243

national legislature is used as a criterion for the strength of
Freemasonry in France, the same criterion applied to Masonic
membership in the CJnited States Congress shows the Fraternity's
control of public life on this side of the Atlantic has been much more
pronounced than in France.

In 1923, for example, 300 of 435 members of the CJ.S. House of
Representatives (69 percent) were members of the Craft, as were 60
of 96 members of the CJ.S. Senate (63 percent).®® Six years later, 67
percent of the entire CJ.S. Congress was comprised of members of the
Masonic Brotherhood.®^

Although Masons continued to hold a dominant position in the
House and Senate in 1941, their proportion of the total membership
dropped to 53 percent in the Senate and 54 percent in the House. In
1957, a "typical" member of the 85th Congress was a Mason. ®^

Subsequently, Congressional membership in the Masonic
Fraternity seemed to be less pronounced, so that by 1984, for
instance, only 14 Senators (14 percent) identified themselves as
members of the Craft, as did 51 House members.®^

Those figures, however, are not entirely accurate, because some
public figures do not always announce their membership in the Craft.
Typical of such coy Masons in public life is Congressman Jack F.
Kemp (R., NY). The former football star and Presidential candidate
does not list his Masonic affiliation in the biographical sketch he
provided for the 1983-1984 Official Congressional Directory; nor does
it appear in the routine curriculum vitae handed out by his office.
However, the Buffalo News reported in 1986 that Rep. Kemp is "a
member of Fraternal Lodge, F&AM, in Hamburg, New York; a
member of Palmoni Lodge of Perfection, 14th Degree; Palmoni
Council, Princes of Jerusalem, 16th Degree; Buffalo Chapter of Rose
Croix, 18th Degree; and Buffalo Consistory, 32nd Degree." In
September, 1987, the Supreme Council of the Scottish Rite of the
Northern Jurisdiction singled him out to receive the 33rd Degree of
that Rite in Boston in September, 1987.®"^

But it has not been the Legislative Branch alone in the Clnited
States which has been subjected to strong Masonic influence. The
Craft's control of the Supreme Court already has been explored; and
although Masonry's authority has not been as pronounced in the
Executive Branch as in the two others, the secret Brotherhood has
had good representation among Chief Executives. Seventeen of 40
Presidents have been members of the Craft, some of whom have been
much more ardent in their attachment to the Fraternity than others.

In addition to George Washington and Andrew Johnson, among

244

more recent Presidents who have been Masons are Franklin D.
Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman, Lyndon B. Johnson and Gerald R. Ford.

Of Roosevelt, the Grand Lodge of New York remarked in its official
publication that if world Masonry ever comes into being, historians
will give much credit to the period when Franklin Delano Roosevelt
was President.®^

President Harry Truman, a Past Grand Master of the Grand Lodge
of Missouri, was quoted as saying: "Although 1 hold the highest civil
honor in the world, 1 have always regarded my rank and title as a Past
Grand Master of Masons as the greatest honor that has ever come to
me."®®

Following President Truman's death in 1972, the Scottish Rite
Grand Commander hailed the Missouri-born Chief Executive as "a
devoted son" of the Fraternity, and "the first President of the CJnited
States to have been coroneted an Inspector General Honorary of the
Thirty-third Degree (1945)."®^

Masons serving in Cabinet posts under President Roosevelt were
Henry Morganthau, Secretary of the Treasury; Homer Cummings and
Robert H. Jackson (later a Supreme Court Justice), Attorneys-
General; Daniel Roper and Jesse Jones, Secretaries of Commerce;
George Dern, Secretary of War; and Claude Swanson and Frank
Knox, Secretaries of the Navy.

Among Masons in President Truman's Cabinet were James F.
Byrnes and George C. Marshall, Secretaries of State; Tom Clark,
Attorney General (and later Supreme Court Justice); Fred Vinson,
Secretary of Treasury (and later Chief Justice); Louis Johnson,
Secretary of Defense; Clinton Anderson, Secretary of Agriculture; and
Henry Wallace, Secretary of Commerce. Mr. Wallace also served as
Vice President during Franklin D. Roosevelt's third term.

During World War 11, under both Presidents Roosevelt and Truman,
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General George C. Marshall;
the Commander of the CJ.S. Fleet, Admiral Ernest King; and the Chief
of the CJ.S. Army Air Corps, General Henry H. Arnold--were all
members of the Masonic Fraternity.

Freemasons serving under President Dwight D. Eisenhower (a
non-Mason) were Sherman Adams, his Chief of Staff; Christian Herter,
Secretary of State; Douglas McKay, Secretary of Interior; and Robert
B. Anderson, Secretary of the Treasury.®®

The Fraternity's Disguised Power

245

It must be emphasized that many members of the Fraternity do not
disclose their Masonic affiliation, as Congressman Kemp's curriculum
vitae indicates. That aspect of the Craft's operations was made clear
in a 1962 New Age editorial, which said:

"That a man is a Mason is something only another Mason
can know, and the secret of the Master Mason can be simply
and subtly communicated amongst eavesdroppers without the
slightest awareness of non-Masons. [It] is [part of] the
continuing and ancient charm of the age-old rituals and
rites."®®

The same editorial said: "Masons set the basic policies of our
society. Yet the order is not political, and its purposes are not public. It
is religious . .

And one member of the Craft pointed out that there are at least
160 organizations (which he did not identify) that require their
members to also be initiates into the Masonic Fraternity.^ ^

In 1948, the New Age boasted that some ten million adults were
linked directly, or were indirectly associated with the nation's three
million Master Masons. The Scottish Rite publication estimated that
"between one in five and one in 10 of the adult thinking population
come directly within the circle of Masonic influence . .

A candid statement on Masonry's dedication to imposing its
philosophy on the nation, often through men who hold positions of
national leadership, was set forth two years later by a high-ranking
member of the Brotherhood. He said:

"Any teaching which is completely antagonistic to all that
we consider sacred, in religion, in morals and in government,
is subversive of those fundamentals, and on them we depend
for our very existence as a Craft. Our first duty, therefore,
becomes one of self-preservation, which includes defense of
those principles for which we stand and by which we live. This
duty cannot be discharged by complete silence on the
subject, and this view, it is encouraging to note, is today
shared by most of those who speak Masonically in the Clnited
States."

Significantly, the writer concluded by noting that some men who
were leading the nation at that time were also "leaders of the Craft."
He declared:

246

"This nation was nurtured on the ideals of Freemasonry; . .
. most of those who are today its leaders are also members
and leaders of the Craft. They know that our American
Democracy, with its emphasis on the inalienable rights and
liberties of the individual, is Freemasonry in government . .
m73

Perhaps typical of how leaders of the Craft work within the
government was the cancellation in 1955 by the Senate Judiciary
Committee of a hearing to openly explore and discuss the real
meaning of the religion-clause of the First Amendment. It is possible
such a hearing might have been considered discussion of a "teaching
which is completely antagonistic to all that we consider sacred."

At any rate, the New Age reported that the Senate committee had
announced in August that it would commence hearings on the
religion-clause of the First Amendment beginning October 3. The
Masonic publication also made clear that it was opposed to such
hearings. Subsequently, the magazine reported: "On September 30,
hasty announcement was made by the Chairman of the
subcommittee. Sen. Thomas C. Hennings, Jr., of Missouri, that public
hearings on the religion-clause would be postponed."

The late Sen. Hennings was a 33rd Degree Mason.

In 1960, the Grand Commander related how the federal
government was used to help consolidate two lodges in Italy into one
Supreme Council. The situation developed as a result of Italian
dictator Benito Mussolini taking over the Masonic Temple in Rome.
Following his assassination, the Temple's ownership passed to the
Italian government, a transaction upheld by Italian courts. The courts
also ruled that the Italian Masons owed 100 million lire in interest and
back rent.

G.S. Masons organized American Friends for Justice for Italian
Freemasonry, under the leadership of Admiral William H. Standley. A
deadline for payment of the 100 million lire was set for February 18,
1960; however, "a sympathetic hearing" was given to the G.S. Masons
by Secretary of State Christian Herter, a 33rd Degree Mason," and the
deadline was extended 90 days. Moreover, while the Temple
remained in the possession of the Italian government. Masons were
given the right to certain portions of the building for 20 years,
beginning in July, 1960. The 100 million lire debt was reduced by
four-fifths, so the Craft was required to pay only 20 million at the rate
of 1 million per year for two decades.

Secretary Herter received the Gourgas Medal of Masonry, which is

247

awarded by the Fraternity "in recognition of notably distinguished
service in the cause of Freemasonry, humanity or country."^®

In 1976, the Grand Commanders of the Scottish Rite bodies of the
Southern and Northern Jurisdictions honored a number of the
Masonic Congressmen. During the ceremonies it was made clear that
"much credit must go to the Brethren in governmental positions." It
was also stated "that good, dedicated, patriotic men can determine
the fate of a nation and contribute to the fulfillment of Freemasonry's
high ideals.

Among the Fraternity's "high ideals" is prohibiting government
support to children attending religious educational institutions. In that
regard, a Washington newspaper column ran two items which were
separated in time by eight months, but clearly reflect how Masonry's
agenda can be accomplished within the government even if the
President of the CJnited States seems to hold a contrary view.

The unsigned column, "Alice in Potomac Land," reported on April
5, 1983:

"Not many lobbyists have the ability to alter public policy
like Timmons and company. Its top dogs. Bill Timmons and
Tom Korologos, are not only veterans of the Nixon/Ford
Administrations, but also helped the Reaganites in the 1980
campaign. They have the luxury of picking and choosing their
clients. So, when they move into the area of family issues,
you know that more is afoot than a [Sen.] Jesse Helms
filibuster. . .

"And then word reached us that Timmons has been using
his old contacts at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue to bring about a
meeting between President Reagan and Henry Clausen, the
head of the Masonic Order. The purpose of the chat is to talk
the Old Man out of his support for tuition tax credits, which the
Masons adamantly oppose."

Just over eight months later, on December 13, 1983, the same
column ran the following item:

"Those folks who were active in the fight for tuition tax
credits said all along that White House legislative affairs
director Ken Duberstein didn't have his heart in the struggle,
even though his boss, the President, was leading the charge.
Now they think they know why.

"Mr. Duberstein is leaving the administration to join
Timmons and Co., the high-powered lobbying firm.

248

Conservatives feel that Mr. Duberstein was so intent on
moving out of government into the big bucks that he didn't
want to risk his marketability by twisting arms for
conservative causes."^®

The Military And Masonry

The Masonic Fraternity has been working within military units for
many years. The officer cadre of Masonry in the armed forces is
known as the Sojourners Club.^®

However, the Craft recognizes that secret organizations
uncontrolled by the military itself are not looked upon favorably by
military commanders. In that regard, one Craftsman noted that lodges
have been closed "owing to the disapproval of military authorities."®®
The same source suggested one method of enhancing acceptance
of a Masonic lodge within the military is to appoint officials, such as
regimental commanders, as First Masters of Regimental Lodges.®^

An example of penetrating military organizations with Masonic
philosophy was discussed in a 1945 New Age editorial. The item
concerned the California College in China, formerly of Peiping, but
operating in "exile" in California. The editor said:

"This is one of the educational institutions to the support of
which the Supreme Council Southern Jurisdiction contributes.

W. B. Pettus, 33rd Degree, who is connected with the college,
writes: 'Many of us in California College in China do not forget
. . .that our college Foundation here in this state really had its
beginning in the Scottish Rite Temple in Los Angeles.'"

The editorial continued by noting the "wartime object" of the
College:

"... it is important that the officers of the Army and
Marine Corps should be trained for their service in the Far
East in institutions guided by similar principles which accord
with those things for which our Scottish Rite stands. This is
true of California College in China, and I am glad that during
1945 we are to be training some 360 officers of the Army, and
a comparable number of Intelligence officers of the Marine
Corps. "®^

249

Another sobering 1968 report concerned a group of 17 West Point
graduates who, one month before being commissioned second
lieutenants, were "obligated" as "soldier Masons . . .to carry out our
[i.e.. Masonry's] Ideals in Vietnam."

The ceremony of obligation was attended by 457 people (135 had
to be turned away), and the principal speaker was Lt. General Herman
Nickerson, 33rd Degree, Chief of Staff for Manpower and Director of
Personnel of the Cl.S. Marine Corps.

The report gave no indication whether "Masonry's ideals in
Vietnam" were the same as those of the Clnited States. For an
organization that has long been identified as "a State within the State,"
a fomenter of revolutions, and the successor-custodian of the Mystery
Religions, it was a rather significant omission.

In 1985, an interesting letter from the Grand Commander of the
Grand Lodge of New York came to my attention. It was addressed to
then Congressman Jack Kemp (R., NY), a 32nd degree Mason at that
time.

The Grand Commander saluted the Congressman as "Dear
Brother Kemp," and asked him to approach President Ronald Reagan
to determine whether the very popular Chief Executive would be
willing to accept membership in Scottish Rite Masonry of the Northern
Jurisdiction. At that time, 1 was informed by a White House source
that this offer had been declined. (Whether it was declined by the
President himself or by a key White House staff member is not
known.)

Consequently, it was surprising to learn of the successful coup by
the Scottish Rite Masons of the Southern Jurisdiction. (It may be of
interest to note that while the formal "See" of the Scottish Rite of the
Southern Jurisdiction--as the Brethren love to call their headquarters-
-is located at Charleston, South Carolina [latitude 33 degrees], its
administrative headquarters, known as the House of the Temple, is
located just up the street from the White House at 1733 16th Street,
NW.) In its issue of April, 1988, the New Age reported that President
Reagan had Joined the ranks of the Scottish Rite Masons (presumably
"by sight").

The New Age reproduced President Reagan's letter of February
22, 1988, written on White House stationery, addressed to Illustrious
C. Fred Kleinknecht, Sovereign Grand Commander of The Supreme
Council of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry,
Southern Jurisdiction. In the letter the President referred to his
meeting with members of the Fraternity which had taken place at the
White House on February 11, 1988. The letter stated:

250

"... I truly valued the opportunity to commend the
outstanding charitable work of the Masons as one of our
nation's oldest fraternal organizations.

"Please accept my sincere gratitude for the framed
certificate of membership and other tokens of friendship [a
copy of Anchor of Liberty, a replica of the House of the
Temple and a jar of sourwood honey] which you and
Illustrious Brother Paul presented to me. 1 am honored to Join
the ranks of the sixteen former Presidents in their association
with Freemasonry."

The ultimate success of the Masons in claiming one of the most
popular Presidents in history as one of their own is simply a recent
example of what Albert Pike meant when he said that "Masons . . .do
not plume themselves on the fact that [any prominent personage was
or is] a Mason ... it is because his civic reputation sheds glory on the
Order." (See supra, p. 235).

251

AFTERWORD

America has lost its way.

And it has done so, as the preceding pages have documented,
through the determined and protracted efforts of an international
secret society which has largely operated as "a state within a state."

The late historian Christopher Dawson wrote: "The great
civilisations of the world do not produce the great religions as a kind
of by-product; in a very real sense, the great religions are the
foundations on which the great civilisations rest."^

To a large extent, the CJnited States, in its art and architecture, its
morals and music, and in its national and foreign policies, impresses
many as a civilization in decline. And the argument is here made that
this is happening because the fundamental Christian ethic which
shaped the nation is being rapidly eroded. The body politic is largely
sustained by the lingering fragrance of an abandoned Faith.

But the record shows the vast majority of the American people did
not voluntarily abandon their Christian vitality: it was taken away from
them by a series of artificially grounded decisions concerning the
religion-clause of the First Amendment at a time when the Court was
dominated by Justices who were Freemasons.

One of those men. Justice Hugo L. Black, was a member not only
of the militantly anti-Catholic and anti-Christian Masonic Order, but of
its adjunct, the notorious Ku Klux Klan.

Moreover, he is known to have expressed his interest in
"advancing liberal religion," could "not tolerate any sign of
encouraging religious faith by state aid," and initiated a campaign to
have the Masonic Fraternity support legislation which would aid
public schools only.^

The Masonic Fraternity immersed itself in a relentless attack on
government practices which suggested minimal accommodation of
traditional religions. The Craft did so by bringing before the courts
case after case challenging these various aspects of minimal State
toleration of and cooperation with traditional religious practices. It was
Supreme Court decisions on those cases which eroded the Christian
orientation that had been a hallmark of the CJnited States.

The evidence set forth in this book has only scratched the surface
of the Masonic iceberg which threatens the Bark of Peter and the Ship

252

of State.

The remarkable thing is that the State--which is mandated to
"insure domestic tranquility . . .promote the general welfare, and
secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity"--has
been seriously derelict in challenging Masonic rule in America.

Repeatedly, the Masonic Fraternity has been found to be
dangerous to Church and State. These findings have been made and
publicized by numerous Popes, heads of State, several legislatures,
various church denominations, and Scotland Yard. Yet, the CJnited
States Government, which has the authority and the ability to
investigate this secret world-wide organization--an anachronism in a
free and open society--has studiously failed to investigate the Craft or
to question its initiates who serve in key positions in government.

In 1921, a leading newspaper. The World (New York), after
concluding a 20-part series on the danger of the Ku Klux Klan (which
was closely identified with Masonry), worried about the Klan's secret
oath, an oath which demanded "unconditional obedience to the as yet
unknown constitution and laws, regulations ... .of the Knights of the
Ku Klux Klan."

The newspaper also was disturbed by the "rigid secrecy" imposed
on Klan members "even in the face of death."

The World said it "has always in mind the potential danger to the
United States from a secret organization bound together by such an
oath . . .and likely to draw into its ranks men of [sic] no regard for
anything but the Ku Klux law and standards of conduct and ethics."^

The fact is. Freemasonry also has secret, blood-curdling oaths,
and demands of its initiates "unconditional obedience to the as yet
unknown constitution and laws, regulations" of the Craft.

Almost immediately after that article appeared, the Rules
Committee of the CJ.S. House of Representatives conducted several
days of hearings on the activities of the Klan, at which The World's
editor was the first witness. However, the hearings were suddenly
concluded following a proposal by a member of Congress to
investigate all secret societies, which, of course, would have included
the Freemasons.

In 1923, the State of New York approved a statute which said, in
part, that every membership corporation and association "having a
membership of twenty or more persons, which corporation or
association requires an oath as a prerequisite or condition of
membership . . .shall file . . .a sworn copy of its constitution, by-laws,
rules, regulations and oath of membership, together with a roster of its
membership and a list of its officers for the current year..."

253

Another section of the same law stipulated that any person who
joined such a group or remained a member, with knowledge that the
entity "failed to comply with any provisions of this article, shall be
guilty of a misdemeanor."^

The Freemasons, Grand Army of the Republic, the Odd Fellows (a
Masonic adjunct) and the Knights of Columbus were exempt from the
legislation.

The Klan, in court, objected to the law. They argued that the
statute deprived them of liberty, under the due process clause, in that
it prevented them from exercising their right of membership and
association.

The Court responded that "membership in the association . . .must
yield to the rightful exertion of the police power."

Continuing, the Court said: "There can be no doubt that under that
power, the State may prescribe and apply to associations having an
oath-bound membership any reasonable regulation calculated to
confine their purposes and activities within limits which are consistent
with the rights of others and the public welfare."

The information mandated by the law to be furnished "will operate
as an effective or substantial deterrent from the violations of public
and private right to which the association might be tempted if such a
disclosure were not required."^

Regarding the requirement that the Klan register and have its
activities examined, the Court said the State "may direct its law
against what it deems the evil as it actually exists without covering
the whole field of possible abuses."®

As for specifically excluding the Masons and Knights of
Columbus, the Court said: "These organizations and their purposes
are well known, many of them having been in existence for many
years. Many of them are oath-bound and secret. But we hear no
complaints against them regarding violation of the peace or
interfering with the rights of others.^

Of course, the secret work of Masonry is not at all "well known,"
but the long history of complaints against it by such respected
sources as numerous Popes, heads of State and various legislatures
should suggest that a thorough investigation of the Craft clearly is in
order.

In a minority opinion in the New York Supreme Court's Appellant
Division, Judge Davis noted that the Masons were "bitterly assailed
and charged with all sorts of crimes and delinquencies," but that
"natural moderation and good sense" prevailed, and "no legislation
was required in the interest of public safety or welfare to suppress"

254

Masonry.

At the same time, Judge Davis conceded that there "can be no
doubt that societies having principles subversive to the government
or peace and good order may be banned and their members
forbidden to meet."®

This book has offered substantial data which demonstrates that
Masonry is a society "having principles subversive to the government
or peace and good order" of the nation and of those citizens who wish
to freely exercise their religion.

Scottish Rite Masonry's Grand Philosopher, Albert Pike, in his
magnum opus. Morals and Dogma--which is given to each initiate
into the Fourth Degree--makes this statement:

"Masonry teaches that the Present is our scene of action,
and the Future for speculation and trust . . . [Man] is sent into
this world not to be constantly hankering after, dreaming of,
preparing for another . . .

"The Gnseen cannot hold a higher place in our affections
than the Seen and the Familiar. . .

"Those only who have a deep affection for this world will
work resolutely for its amelioration. Those who under-value
this life naturally become querulous and discontented and
lose their interest in the welfare of their fellows . . .

"The earth, to the Mason, is both the starting place and
goal of immortality."®

To indicate the type of mentality to which such a philosophy
appeals, it is instructive to read how closely Brother Pike's sentiment
was expressed some years later by a leader of another sinister
organization. That man said:

"We don't want people who keep one eye on the life in the
hereafter. We need free men who feel and know that God is in
themselves."

The latter statement was made by Adolph Hitler.^®

Obviously, the government, which alone has the ability to probe
deeply into Masonry, does not wish to challenge the Craft, because
many members of Congress owe their seats to the Fraternity.
However, the public can do something to neutralize this organization
that has led the assault on the Christian religion, and has a long
history of involvement in fomenting discord, dissension and
revolution. Members of the public can--

255

* Conduct independent research into all aspects of
Freemasonry by reading books about the Craft; searching
libraries, lodges, attics, and government documents available
through the Freedom of Information Act.

* Make membership in the Masonic Fraternity a criterion
for assessing the qualifications and philosophy of candidates
for public office.

* CJrge State legislators as well as CJ.S. Congressmen and
Senators to conduct public investigations of the Fraternity and
expose its oaths, penalties and purposes.

* Insist that "secret societies" be subjected to scrutiny
and that their records and membership be made available to
the public.

* Demand to know why there must be "secrets" in an open
society if an organization is merely a charitable and fraternal
group.

Of critical importance is prayer. "For our wrestling is not against
flesh and blood; but against principalities and powers, against the
rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness
in the high places." (St. Paul's Letter to the Ephesians, 6:12).

256

Appendix A

UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JUSTICES WHO WERE

FREEMASONS

257

259

JUSTICES

260

Samuel

Nelson

261

262

263

Yean Masons JUSTICES

264

Lurton

265

267

^ e

= u

xa

c

VI

d a

.

r^i

't

fn

R «

Yean

i

1 I

1

fn

S £

268

Blackmun

269

Names in boldface denote Masonic membership.

^Ten Thousand Famous Freemasons by William R. Denslow, Board of
Publication, Transactions of the Missouri Lodge of Research, St. Louis, 1957, 3
vols. Vol. 1, p. 275. Justices of the Supreme Court Identified As Masons by
Brother Ronald E. Heaton, The Masonic Service Association, Washington, D.C.,
1969, p. 12

■p

Ten Thousand, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 102. Justices Identified, op. cit., p. 5.

■!)

Ten Thousand, op. cit., vol. 3, p. 315. Justices Identified, op. cit., p. 24.
^Appointment not confirmed by the Senate. Justices Identified, op. cit., p.

^Ten Thousand, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 20. Justices Identified, op. cit., shows
Ellsworth only as an "Applicant" in 1765, p. 14.

®Ten Thousand, op. cit., vol. 3, p. 139. Justices Identified, op. cit., p. 19.

^Justices Identified, op. cit., shows that Justice Todd withdrew from Masonry
in Dec., 1811, p. 31.

Ibid., p. 32.

^Ten Thousand, op. cit., lists Justice Baldwin's name only, p. 5. Justices

24.

8

Identified states that he withdrew from Masonry in 1809, p. 3.

'’^Ten Thousand, vol. 1, p. 193. Justices Identified states that Justice Catron
was "not on the roll" at the time of his death in 1865, p. 9.

11

12n

Ibid., p. 29

men Thousand, vol. 2, p. 184. However, we learn that he was "probably"
an Entered Apprentice in 1858, but that his name "disappears from the list of
Entered Apprentices . . . after 1867." Justices Identified, p. 16.

Demitted" (i.e., resigned) from Masonry sometime after 1854. Ibid., p. 37.

13 „

14

15 .

Ten Thousand, vol. 3, p. 152. Justices Identified, p. 20.

Ten Thousand, vol. 1, p. 105. Justice Blatchford was "stricken" from the

rolls of his lodge in 1873. Justices Identified, p. 6.

16 .

17

18,1

19 .

20

Ten Thousand, vol. 3, p. 221. Justices Identified, p. 22.

Ibid., p. 33.

Demitted," April, 1923. Ibid., p. 25.

Ten Thousand, vol. 1, p. 219. Justices Identified, p. 11.

Ibid., p. 30. Justice Taft was cited, ibid., as being very active in Masonic

affairs.

21

22

24

25

26
27

Ibid., p.

4.

Ibid., p.

26

Ibid., p.

13

Ibid., p.

8.

Ibid., p.

17

Ibid., p.

27

Ibid., p.

7.

271

2®Ibid., p. 34.

PQ

Ibid., p. 21. Justice Minton became a convert to Catholicism and
"demitted" Jan. 8, 1946.

^°Ibid., p. 10.

^Mbid., p. 35.

Justices Identified.

^^Ibid., p. 28.

^“^New York Times, August 25, 1979. Justice Marshall was a member of the
Black "Prince Hall" branch of Freemasonry.

272

Appendix B

The Depth Of George
Washington's Masonry

Masons regularly allege that "the Father of our Country," President
George Washington, was one of the most illustrious and active
members of the Craft. However, the historic record indicates he only
had tenuous ties to Masonry, probably because it was a potent
political force in the 18th Century.

The subject became an issue in the 1970s when the Disabled
American Veterans (DAV) distributed a booklet which stated that the
nation's first President had been "not a very active" member of the
Fraternity. The DAV also suggested that Masonry attempts to
capitalize on Washington's nominal membership to bring unwarranted
merit to the international secret society.

The Grand Commander of the Scottish Rite of the Southern
Jurisdiction attempted to rebut the Veterans' position, but his
documentation, in reality, tended to confirm the DAV's charge.

The Scottish Rite chieftain noted that Washington became a
Freemason at the Fredericksburg, Virginia Lodge on August 4, 1753,
and visited that lodge later the same year, and again in 1755.

However, the Grand Commander's record shows that it was not
until 1776--23 years later--that Washington participated in any
Masonic activity. At that time, he marched in a Masonic procession in
Philadelphia.

The following year, he celebrated "St. John's Day" with a military
lodge in New York, and did the same thing later that year with a New
Jersey military lodge.

(There are two "St. John's" Days. One ostensibly refers to St. John
the Baptist--June 24, and the other, St. John the Apostle and
Evangelist--Dec. 27. Actually, in Masonry the days refer to solar
worship and represent the summer and winter solstices, when the sun
is at its greatest distances from the celestial equator--a turning point.)

Continuing his catalogue of Washington's purported devotion to
the Masonic Fraternity, the Grand Commander cited brief visits by the
President to various lodges, and incidents when he simply walked in
Masonic processions on five separate occasions between 1781 and

273

1797.

It was also noted that numerous communications from Masons
proposed that Washington receive various awards and
commendations.

The Grand Commander called attention to the Alexandria, Virginia
Lodge receiving a painting of the First President executed by William
Williams of Philadelphia, on order of the Alexandria Lodge, a portrait
for which Washington had sat.

With regard to that situation, responding by letter dated July 3,
1792, to a request from Governor Henry Lee of Virginia that the
President sit for a portrait, Washington said he was "heartily tired" of
sitting for portraits, and had "resolved to sit for no more of them . .
.except in instances where it had been requested by public bodies . .
.and could not, without offense, be refused."

Williams had been refused a sitting by Washington, and
subsequently offered the Alexandria Lodge the finished portrait of the
President if the Masons would request the President to sit for the artist.

The Lodge approved the proposal on August 29, 1793, and the
portrait was completed at Philadelphia in September, 1794. It now is
proudly displayed by the Alexandria Lodge.

See: The Grand Commander's Message: "Exposing The
Debunkers," New Age, February, 1973, pp. 2-11.

The Writings of George Washington, op. cit. (see below, p. 352),
volume 32, p. 93, note 59.

274

Appendix C

The Ancient Mysteries

For more than one thousand years, the Mystery Religions were
familiar in the ancient Mediterranean world, in the Graeco-Roman
region, they dominated from the invasion of the East by Alexander the
Great in 334 B.C. until Constantine, the first Christian emperor,
founded Constantinople in 327 A.D.^

These cults--of which Masonry is the modern-day successor--
were predicated upon Gnosticism, a belief in a spurious "knowledge"
of the origin, control and destiny of the universe. This "knowledge"
supposedly originated in Egypt or Chaldea, and was handed down
through an ancient message transmitted secretly by a chain of
initiates.^

The "mysteries" were for a select few, who were bound by solemn
oaths not to reveal the cult's rites. These religions were strongly
opposed by the early Church as "strange doctrines" and "myths" that
"come from the devils." in his First Letter to Timothy (6:20), St. Paul
urged the members of the Church under his jurisdiction to avoid "the
profane novelties of words, and oppositions of knowledge falsely so
called [i.e.. Gnosticism]."^

Actually, as St. Paul noted in his Letter to the Colossians, the
"mysteries" were distorted shadows of the real "Mystery" hidden from
the ages and generations: the reality of Christ, the Redeemer and
Saviour promised long ago to mankind, who offers salvation to all
men who believe in Him. [Col. 2:6-18].

Charles Heckethorn, in his penetrating analysis of secret
societies, noted that in prehistoric times man possessed a true
knowledge of nature and her workings. That is why the "mysteries" of
the most distant nations had so much in common. The common
knowledge among different races and peoples was transmitted from a
common source.^

Heckethorn said this prehistoric knowledge "was gradually
distorted by perverse interpretations" and embroidered by fanciful
creations of man's brain. ^

Originally, the sun, moon and stars were seen as outward
manifestations of the power of the Eternal Life. However, the multitude

275

was more interested in satisfying material wants and "hence arose the
personification of the heavenly bodies and terrestrial seasons
depending upon them." Gradually, the human figure, which originally
had been a symbol, came to be looked upon as the representation of
an individual being that had actually lived upon earth. Thus were born
Chrisna, Fo, Osiris, Hermes, Hercules and other "divine" beings.®

In all the "mysteries" there was a superior being who suffers death
and recommences a more glorious existence. Everywhere there was
a grand event of mourning followed immediately by the most lively
joy. Moreover, some intimation of the CJnity and Trinity of God was
common to ancient doctrines, as was the "prototype of the Christian
dogma in which a virgin is seen bringing forth a Savior, and yet
remaining a virgin." To the primitive people that mystery is seen as
Virgo in the Zodiac, and the "savior" brought forth is the Sun.^

Also, in all the "mysteries," light was represented as born out of
darkness--thus Kali, Isis, Ceres, Proserpine, represent the night from
whose bosom issues life, and into which the life returns.

In all the mysteries too, there are symbols of purification and
salvation.®

In these false religions, these various aspects of the "mysteries,"
as St. Paul noted, particularly the common theme of a "Savior,"
demonstrate a faint glimmering of the truth of Divine revelation which
was to be revealed by Jesus Christ.®

Another aspect of the "mysteries" included a requirement that
candidates for membership pass through seven caves or ascend
seven steps, or be transported through the seven planets--a theme
which is reflected in modern Masonic initiations.^®

One Mason observed that the religious symbols painted upon the
walls and tombs of ancient Egypt tend to make a Freemason "almost
believe he is witnessing a scene at an initiation," as he notices the
apron, grips, signs, postures and symbols and other features common
to Masonic lodges so vividly displayed.^ ^

Another member of the Craft said Sun worship was "the foundation
from which has been gradually elaborated the various mysteries and
cults which gave us Masonry as we find it today."

This same source said the cults of Dionysus or Bacchus
developed from phallic worship. That cult held speculative and secret
opinions of the unity of God and immortality of the soul. It also had
"signs and symbols and practices similar to those found in
Freemasonry . .

The Phrygians worshiped the Magna Mater (the Great Mother),
sometimes identified as Ma or Cybele, the fecund mother of all things.

276

In the wild orgies of worship associated with that mystery religion,
some devotees voluntarily wounded themselves, and, becoming
intoxicated with the view of blood, with which they sprinkled their
altars, they believed they were uniting themselves with their divinity.
Others sacrificed their virility to the gods.^"^

St. Augustine wrote that, as a young man, he "took pleasure in the
shameful games which were celebrated in honor of the gods and
goddesses," including Cybele. On the day consecrated to her
purification, "there were sung before her couch productions so
obscene and filthy for the ear . . .so impure, that not even the mother
of the foul-mouthed players themselves could have formed one of the
audience."

Continuing, he said, "the lewd actions and filthy words with which
these players honoured the mother of the gods . . .they could not for
very shame have rehearsed at home in presence of their own
mothers.

Effeminate men were consecrated to the Great Mother, and in the
rites of Liber (the god of the seed of fruits and animals) the devotees
worshiped "the private parts of a man."^®

During the ceremonial rites dedicated to the Great Mother, a
young man stood beneath a platform upon which a steer was
slaughtered and showered himself with the animal's blood. After the
blood bath, the gore-covered mystic offered himself to the veneration
of the crowd. The ceremony was known as the taurobolia. St. Peter's
Basilica in Rome stands on the very spot where the last taurobolia
took place at the end of the fourth century.

The Egyptian goddess Isis was honored especially by "women
with whom love was a profession." Juvenal referred to her as a
procuress, and her temples "were frequented by young men in quest
of gallant adventures."^®

The morals of the cult of Isis and Osiris were viewed by the
Roman community at large as very loose, and the mystery
surrounding it excited the worst suspicions. Additionally, its secret
societies were suspected of easily becoming "clubs of agitators and
haunts of spies." Consequently, the Roman Senate had the altars
dedicated to these mysteries torn down on four separate occasions,
59 B.C., 58 B.C., 53 B.C. and 48 B.C.i®

The celebrations associated with the worship of Isis included the
"Finding of Osiris," a ceremony commonly used in Masonic
initiations. In the ceremony, Osiris is killed by an opponent's attack,
after which the former is buried. The attacker is vanquished by Horus,
the son of Isis and Osiris, and the dead father is restored to life.^®

277

Astrology--a practice condemned in both the Old and New
Testaments--influenced the Mysteries of Mithra.^^

Persia introduced dualism as a fundamental principle of religion,
and deified the evil principle. It was taught that both evil and the
supreme deity must be worshiped. Also, Persian Mithraism preached
absolute fidelity to its oaths. And like Masonry, it preached fraternity.
"All the initiates considered themselves as sons of the same father
owing to one another a brother's affection.

This dualism taught that the world is the scene of perpetual
struggle between two powers that share mastery. The true believer
was constantly in combat with evil in order to bring about the triumph
of Ormuzd.^^

The Persian Mazdeans brought the dimension of magic to their
rites and made their "mysteries" a reversed religion with a liturgy
focused on the infernal powers. "There was no miracle the
experienced magician might not expect to perform with the aid of
demons. . . . Hence the number of impious practices performed in the
dark, practices the horror of which is equaled only by their absurdity:
preparing beverages that disturbed the senses and impaired the
intellect; mixing subtle poisons extracted from demoniac plants and
corpses already in the state of putridity; immolating children in order
to read the future in their quivering entrails or to conjure up ghosts . .
m24

These were some of the "Ancient Mysteries" about which
Freemasons boast of being the modern successors.

These mysteries are based on myths. There never was a real
Mithra, nor a Great Mother, nor an Isis nor Osiris.

That is why the "Mysteries" passed from the scene with the advent
of Christianity. The new religion could boast of a Founder of unique
holiness and power who had actually lived among men and women.
His teachings were new, arresting, different, and promised salvation
not to the select few, but to all mankind.

The ethical ideals yearned for by men through the ages, and the
Redeemer and Saviour spoken of through unnumbered generations,
actually came among us when God became incarnated upon earth.
True God and True Man entered history, and the world has not been
the same since. Indeed, history is divided between all that happened
in the world Before Christ and all that has happened in the Years of
Our Lord--B.C. and A.D.^^

278

Notes/ Amazing Discovery

1. Everson v. Board of Education, 330 CI.S. 1 (1947).

2. Ibid., pp. 15-16.

3. McCollum V. Board of Education, 333 CJ.S. 203 (1948).

4. Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 G.S. 488 (1961).

5. Engel v. Vitale, 370 G.S. 421 (1962); Wallace v. Jaffree, No. 83-812
(1985).

6. Abington Township v. Schempp, 374 G.S. 203 (1963).

7. Joseph R Lash, 'The World of Felix Frankfurter," The Washington Post,
"Outlook" section, Washington, D.C., August 10, 1975, p. 1.

8. "The Papers of Felix Frankfurter," Manuscript Division, Library of
Congress, Washington, D.C., last box.

9. Ibid., letter undated, but apparently prior to the Court's 1922 term.

10. Ibid., box 225.

11. Ibid., box 70.

12. Joseph P. Lash, from The Diaries Of Felix Frankfurter, New York, W. W.
Norton and Co., 1975, p. 342.

13. "Frankfurter Papers," box 125, "Hugo Black Correspondence."

14. Harlan B. Phillips, Felix Frankfurter Reminisces, New York, Reynal and
Company, 1960, pp. 290-291.

15. Ibid., p. 13.

16. "Frankfurter Papers," box 99, letter dated January 22, 1944.

17. Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 G.S. 510 (1925).

18. Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 G.S. 410 (1923).

19. "Frankfurter Papers," box 125. Frankfurter's letter to the Times appeared
in the June 6, 1925 issue, p. 6.

20. "Frankfurter Papers," box 125.

21. Ibid.

22. The Holmes-Laski Letters, The Correspondence of Mr. Justice Holmes
and Harold J. Laski, 1916-1935, Mark De Wolfe Howe, ed., Cambridge, Mass.,
Harvard Gniversity Press, 1953.

23. Ibid., p. xiii.

24. Ibid., p. 3.

25. Ibid., p. 88.

26. Ibid., p. 476.

27. Ibid., p. 77.

28. Ibid., p. 631.

29. Ibid., p. 1450.

30. Ibid., pp. 79-80.

31. "Frankfurter Papers," box 19, letter from Acheson, February 2, 1953.

32. For example, see his Reason and Civilization, London, Victor Qollancz,
Ltd., 1944, p. 195ff., where he expressed strong opposition to any Christian
concept of society. The Church and Christianity, he said, offer "freedom only in a
prison house."

In his Studies in Law and Politics, New Haven, Conn., Yale Gniversity Press,
1932, p. 163, Laski said it is difficult to overestimate the significance of the

279

judiciary in the modem State. He pointed out that in countries, such as the
United States, which are governed by written constitutions, judges "are the
appointed interpreters and masters of the constitution." (Emphasis added).

33. "Frankfurter Papers," ACLU folder, box 125. The same folder contains a
number of ACLU pamphlets and other printed matter for the years 1925, 1928,
and 1931. Frankfurter is listed as a member of the National Committee of the
ACLU in the folder.

34. See notes 1,3, and 4, supra. See also the cases cited and the records
and briefs in those cases.

Justice Frankfurter took no part in the Engel (State-sanctioned prayer) case.

1 wrote a series of articles about the ACLU, based on the files of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI), which appeared in the National Catholic Register
during September-November, 1977. The two lead articles in that series titled,
respectively, "Justices Tied To ACLU Decided Church Lawsuits," and "Possible
Court Bias In Church-State Cases," reported on some aspects of the relationship
of certain Justices to the Union.

The latter article disclosed that Justice Frankfurter joined his colleagues
Justices Tom C. Clark and Douglas as sponsors of a testimonial dinner to honor
Roger Baldwin, founder of the Union, on February 22, 1950. That same article
cited Canon Number 3 of the American Bar Association's "Canons of Judicial
Ethics," which stipulates: "A judge . . .should not suffer his conduct to justify the
impression that any person can improperly influence or unduly enjoy his favor, or
that he is affected by the kinship, rank, position or influences of any party or
other person." See the National Catholic Register, Los Angeles, CA, September
18, 1977, p. 1.

35. "Burton Papers," Box 51. Letter from Davies to Burton, dated February
28, 1947.

36. The Jefferson Bible With Annotated Commentaries On The Religion Of
Thomas Jefferson, New York, Clarkson N. Potter, Inc., 1964, p. 10. The "bible"
basically is a compilation in several languages of the King James version in
which all references to Christ as the Son of God and Messiah are omitted, as are
all references to His miraculous and supernatural activities.

37. "Burton Papers," box 51.

38. The Washington Post, September 15, 1949, p. 2-B.

39. Everson, p. 33. The Court handed down its decision on February 10,
1947.

40. Ibid., p. 59.

41. The New Columbia Encyclopedia, entry on Michael Servitus, New York,
Columbia University Press, 1975, p. 2480.

42. The Mind And Faith Of A. Powell Davies, edited by Justice William O.
Douglas, Garden City, New York, Doubleday and Co., 1959, pp. 242-243.

43. Ibid., pp. 245-246.

44. "Justice Black's Papers," box 25, "General Correspondence, Davies, A.
Powell, 1953-1957." The sermon is titled, "When Dreams Dissolve," and is dated
Sunday, April 26, 1953.

45. Hugo L. Black, Jr., My Father, A Remembrance, New York, Random
House, 1975, p. 204.

46. "Justice Black's Papers," box 25, "General Correspondence, Davies . . .,"
letter to Mrs. Davies, September 27, 1957.

280

47. Ibid., letter to Adams, June 30, 1959.

48. "Justice Black's Papers," box 53, "General Correspondence, Unitarian
Church." The church service was held on May 9, 1963.

49. Ibid. Also see box 25, "General Correspondence, Davies . . .," which
shows that Black gave a check for $100 to All Souls Church on April 9, 1963,
and an identical sum on December 11, 1964. On September 8, 1965, he gave
$100, and an additional $25 on March 3, 1959.

50. "Universalist Values Linked To Nonbelievers," Religious News Service
dispatch. The Washington Post, November 5, 1976.

51. Ibid.

52. Davies, A. Powell, The Faith Of An Unrepentant Liberal, Boston, Mass.,
The Beacon Press, 1946, p. 3.

53. Ibid. Davies said the question reflected a perception of Liberalism held by
some people, but never denied that it also represented his own views.

54. Ibid., p. 14.

55. Ibid., p. 23.

56. Ibid., pp. 24-25.

57. The Mind And Faith Of A. Powell Davies, op. cit., p. 29.

58. Ibid.

59. Ibid., p. 322.

Other books by Davies which express similar sentiments denigrating
Christian beliefs are: American Destiny (A Faith For America), Boston, The
Beacon Press, 1942; The Temptation To Be Good, New York, Farrar, Straus and
Young, 1952; and The Urge To Persecute, Boston, The Beacon Press, 1953.

60. "Burton Papers," box 60.

61. Information compiled from a variety of sources, but principally, William

R. Denslow's Ten Thousand Famous Freemasons (Introduction by Brother Harry

S. Truman, Past Grand Master, Missouri), St. Louis, Transactions of the Missouri
Lodge, 4 vols.; Ronald E. Heaton's Justices Of The United States Supreme Court
Identified As Masons, Washington, D.C., Masonic Service Association, 1969; and
the New Age magazine, Washington, D.C., the official organ of the Supreme
Council, 33rd degree, Mother Council of the World of the Ancient and Accepted
Scottish Rite of Freemasonry for the Southern Jurisdiction of the United States.

62. Justice Murphy came from an anti-clerical family. "The father, enamored
of Jefferson and his teachings, was skeptical about the verities of the priests . . .
none of the children attended parochial schools." The family "share a dominant
secular ideology which borrowed heavily from the Enlightenment, American
nationalism and the Social Gospel ..." See: J. Woodford Howard's Mr. Justice
Murphy, Princeton, New Jersey, Princeton University Press, 1968, p. 4.

Justice Murphy was a board member of the ACLU. Ibid., p. 203.

Justice Brennan was a dominant figure on the Warren Court. Chief Justice
Earl Warren "had led a judicial revolution that reshaped many social and political
relationships in America." His "consensus builder" and "the key strategist among
the liberal bloc" was Justice Brennan. Brennan also was a key molder of the Roe
V. Wade abortion decision in 1973. See Bob Woodward and Scott Armstrong, The
Brethren, New York, Simon and Schuster, 1979, pp. 9, 23, 232, 239.

Chief Justice Warren was a 33rd degree Mason.

63. Justice Goldberg was considered a part of the liberal Warren majority,
and wrote a concurring opinion in the Schempp decision which struck down

281

prayer and Bible reading in public schools.

Justice Fortas was part of the "working Warren majority." See Woodward
and Armstrong, p. 8.

64. Statements by the four future Justices in support of "court packing" may
be found in The New York Times, February 6, 1937, pp. 1, 8; October 13, 1937,
p. 6; February 11, 1938, p. 6; and August 22, 1938, p. 11.

65. In Roth v. CInited States, 354 G.S. 476 (1957), Justice Brennan in the
majority opinion, while denying that obscenity is protected by the Constitution,
posited the unique definition of obscenity as "material which deals with sex in a
manner appealing to prurient interests." He then said the test for obscenity is
"whether to the average person, applying contemporary community standards,
the dominant theme of the material, taken as a whole, appeals to prurient
interests." That permitted such publications as Playboy and Penthouse to display
pornographic nudity in their magazines along with articles on politics, the arts,
economics, etc. by recognized experts in their respective fields.

Other decisions enhanced the distribution of salacious and depraved
material, buttressed by such decisions as Kingsley Books v. Brown, 354 G.S.
436 (1957); Butler v. Michigan, 352 G.S. 380 (1957); Smith v. California, 361
G.S. 147 (1959); Manual Enterprises v. Day, 370 G.S. 478 (1960); and John
Cleland's Memoirs Of A Woman of Pleasure v. Attorney General 383 G.S. 413
(1966).

66. In Dennis v. Gnited States (1951), the Court upheld the constitutionality
of the Smith Act, which made it unlawful "to knowingly or willfully advocate . .
.or teach the duty, necessity, desirability or propriety of overthrowing or
destroying any government in the Gnited States by force or violence."

Six years later, in Yates v. Gnited States, the Court ruled that the Smith Act
does not prohibit the advocacy or teaching of forcible overthrow as an abstract
principle--divorced from any effort to instigate action to that end.

The Court, in Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), found that "mere advocacy" of
overthrowing the government, or other crimes, cannot be punished if "incitement
to imminent lawless action" is not involved.

And in Elfbrandt v. Russell, 384 G.S. 11 (1966), the Court struck down
legislation that required dismissal of a government employee who "knowingly
and willfully remains" a member of the Communist Party or any other
organization "having for one of its purposes" the violent overthrow of
government. See also Keyishian v. Board of Regents, 385 G.S. 589 (1967).

67. J. Allen, "The New Age Dawns," New Age, October, 1959, p. 553.

68. Ibid., "Report of the Committee on Publications," January, 1980, p. 16.

Notes: Chapter 1/ Lifting The Veil

1. Elbert Bede, "What About Today?" New Age, November, 1946, p. 667.

2. New Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, vol. II, article on the Grand Inspector

282

General (33rd degree), New Hyde Park, N.Y., Gniversity Books, 1970, p. 435.

3. Patricia Pullen, "The Politics of Freemasonry," The Sun, Baltimore,
Maryland, December 15, 1976, p. B-1.

4. Sari Gilbert, "Scandal Erupts Over Italian Masonic Lodge," The
Washington Post, May 26, 1981, p. A-16; "Italian Banking Rocked By Scandai,"
ibid., June 22, 1982, p. D-7; and Rupert Cornwell, God's Banker Counterpoint,
Gnwin Paperbacks, London, 1984, pp. 47, 134.

The Vatican Bank's relationship with P-2-related bankers Roberto Caivi and
Michele Sindona is set forth by Comweli on pp. 27-30, 37, 53, 102ff.

5. Cornweli, p. 45.

6. Ibid.

7. Ibid., pp. 47, 134.

8. Charles Grant Hamilton, "Freemasonry, A Prisoner of War," New Age,
August, 1949, pp. 485-486.

Hamilton acknowledged his "indebtedness" to Justice Jackson, "who
revealed to me the possibilities within this subject, [and] who has rendered
invaluable assistance and personal encouragement."

Jackson, in his introduction to the series, said: " . . .among the earliest and
most savage of the many persecutions undertaken by every modem dictatorship
are those directed against the Free Masons." The Supreme Court Justice also
declared that Masons "have suffered persecution under dictators more uniformly
than any other class of victims."

Hamilton noted that some of the material in the series had been presented in
the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials which foliowed World War II.

Justice Jackson resigned his seat on the high bench to accept the post of
Chief Prosecutor at those Thais.

9. "Mussolini Infallible," editorial in the New Age, April, 1934, p. 209.

10. Hamilton, New Age, August, 1949, pp. 486-487.

11. Ibid., p. 487.

12. Ibid., p. 488.

13. Joseph S. Roucek, "Jan Amos Komensky," New Age, July, 1944, pp.
283-285.

See also: William R. Denslow's Ten Thousand Freemasons, vol. 3,
Transactions of the Missouri Lodge of Research, 1957, p. 38. It is of interest to
note that the introduction to Denslow's work was written by Brother Harry S.
Truman, Past Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Missouri, and former President
of the United States.

14. Hamish Fraser, "Freemasonry and the Vatican," Approaches, Ayrshire,
Scotland, February, 1977, p. 26.

15. John Robison, Proofs Of A Conspiracy Against All The Religions And
Governments Of Europe Carried On In The Secret Meetings Of Free Masons,
Illuminati, And Reading Societies, 3rd edition. New York, George Foreman, 1798,
p. 37.

16. Abbe Augusten de Barruel, Memoirs Illustrating The History Of
Jacobinism, 4 volumes, volume 3, "The Anti-Social Conspiracy," London, T.
Burton, 1798, p. xiv.

17. Barruel, volume 1, pp. xxii-xxiii.

18. Ibid.

19. Ibid., p. 4.

283

20. Ibid., p. 27. The letters of Voltaire and his colleagues may be found in
the 92-volume work Ouevres Completes de Voltaire by Pierre Augustin de
Beaumarchais, published by Societe Litteraire-Typographique, Paris, 1785-89.

See particularly the following volumes: 29: "The Rights of Man and the
Usurpation of the Popes"; "The Tocsin of Kings"; and "The Cry of Nations"; 52-
63: "Letters of Voltaire"; 64-66: "Letters of the Prince of Prussia to Voltaire"; 68-
69: "Letters Between Voltaire and D'Alembert"; and 70: "Voltaire and Condorcet."

21. Barruel, volume 1, p. 6.

22. Ibid.

23. New Age, November, 1934, p. 677; March, 1948, p. 143; March, 1977,
pp. 5-6. See also: Charles S. Lobinger, The Supreme Council, the "official history
of the Supreme Council" of the Southern Jurisdiction, The Standard Printing
Company, Louisville, Kentucky, 1931, p. 110.

24. Barruel, volume 2, pp. 282-286, 288-289, and 321-323.

25. Ibid., pp. 294-295.

26. Ibid., pp. 409-410.

The wording of some Masonic oaths will be set forth below.

27. Ibid., pp. 282-286; 288-289.

28. Ibid., p. 313-314.

29. Ibid., pp. 311-312.

30. Barruel, volume 3, p. 139.

31. Ibid., pp. 23-24.

Karl Marx, in his "Manifesto of the Communist Party," speaking of rule by
the proletariat, said such rule "cannot be effected except by means of despotic
inroads on the rights of property and on the conditions of bourgeois production .

It

He added: "When, in the course of development, class distinctions have
disappeared, and all production has been concentrated in the hands of a vast
association of the whole nation, the public power will lose its political character."

And, in 1844, Marx wrote: "The criticism of religion is the beginning of all
criticism."

Frederich Engels declared: "All religious bodies without exception are to be
treated by the state as private associations. They are not to receive support from
public funds or exercise any influence over public education."

The program of the Communist International, adopted at the Sixth World
Congress in 1928, states: "One of the most important tasks of the cultural
revolution affecting the wide masses is the task of systematically and
unswervingly combatting religion--the opium of the people. The proletarian
government must withdraw all state support from the church, which is the
agency of the former ruling class; it must prevent all church interference in state-
organized educational affairs, and ruthlessly suppress the counter revolutionary
activity of the ecclesiastical organisations [sic]. At the same time, the proletarian
state, while granting liberty of worship and abolishing the privileged position of
the formerly dominant religion, carries on anti-religious propaganda with all the
means at its command and reconstructs the whole of its educational work on the
basis of scientific materialism."

The above citations may be found in House Report No. 2241, 84th
Congress, Second Session, The Communist Conspiracy, Part 1, Section A:
Marxist Classics, prepared by the Committee on CJn-American Activities, G.S.

284

Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1956, p. 63 (regarding the
"Manifesto"); pp. 153-154 (relative to Lenin on Religion, from the Little Lenin
Library, No. 7, vol, I, pp. 3-10, 14-15, 17-18, 47-48); and p. 156 (from The
Programme of the Communist International, Workers' Library Publisher, New

York, p.

53).

32.

Barruel, vol. 1, pp. 7-8.

33.

Ibid., pp. 9-10.

34.

Robison, pp. 82-83.

35.

Ibid., p. 85.

36.

Ibid., p. 95.

37.

Ibid., p. 147.

38.

Ibid.

39.

Ibid., p. 148

40.

Ibid.

41.

Ibid.

42.

Ibid., p. 149.

43.

Robison, p. 116.

44.

Ibid., p. 122

45.

Ibid., p. 140.

46.

Barruel, vol. 3, p. 147.

47.

Robison, p. 146.

48.

Ibid., p. 156.

49.

Ibid., pp. 343-344.

50.

Barruel, vol. 4, p. 232.

51.

Ibid., p. 233.

52.

Ibid., p. 248.

Rupert Cornwell, commenting on those involved with the P-2 in Italy, wrote:
"The main appeal to the bulk of the members of [Lido Gelli's] lodge was the
apparent short cut it offered to powers, riches and the best jobs; and for such an
advantage, surrender of secret information to the grandmaster must have seemed
a reasonable price to pay." Cornwell, p. 48.

53. The Herald, New York, December 4, 1794, p. 2.

54. The Writings of George Washington From Original Manuscript Sources,
volume 36, John C. Fitzpatrick, editor, Washington, D.C., C.S. Government
Printing Office, 1941, pp. 452-453.

See also Appendix B above.

55. Ibid., pp. 518-519.

About the time of Rev. Snyder's letter, the LInited States was concerned with
self-created," or so-called "Democratic" Societies. In that connection, on
November 19, 1794, President Washington had sent a message to Congress in
which he said "self-created societies" had led the Whiskey Rebellion in western
Pennsylvania. The insurgents, he stated, had "a spirit inimical to all order," and
had disseminated "suspicions, jealousies, and accusations of the whole
Government." See: Annals of Congress (the title under which the present
Congressional Record was known), November 19, 1794, p. 787.

See also the Federal Intelligencer and Boston Daily Gazette, Baltimore,
Maryland, November 23, 1794, p. 2.

Although Congress was expected to concur quickly with the President, it
soon became evident that friends of the "self-created societies" were reluctant to

285

support him.

Senator Aaron Burr of New York moved to expunge the following words from
the Senate committee's draft response to the Chief Executive: "Our anxiety arises
from the licentious and open resistance to the laws . . . and has been increased
by the proceedings of certain self-created societies relative to the laws of the
administration of Government; proceedings, in our apprehension, founded in
political error, calculated, if not intended, to disorganize our Government, and
which . . . have been influential in misleading our fellow-citizens in the scene of
insurrection."

The motion was defeated and the President was praised by the Senate for his
prompt and vigorous action in sending 15,000 militia to put down the
insurrection.

During the ensuing debate. Senator Theodore Sedgwick of Massachusetts
said Democratic Societies were set up following the arrival at Charleston, South
Carolina from France of Citizen (Edmond) Genet, who had done the utmost
"mischief that was in his power."

Sen. Thomas Scott of Pennsylvania said he knew for a fact that Democratic
Societies not only caused insurrection by their propaganda, but that members of
those societies led the riots.

The Senate voted on November 28, 1794 to condemn the Democratic
Societies. See Annals, same date, pp. 912, 922, 937-938.

That is the political environment at the time President Washington wrote to
Rev. Snyder to concede that "individuals of" Masonic lodges "may" have
propagated "the diabolical tenets" of the Illuminati and the "pernicious principles"
of the Jacobins in this country to separate the people from their government.

Sen. Burr was tried for treason in 1807 for conspiring with General James
Wilkinson to establish a republic in Spanish territory near New Orleans. He was
found not guilty by Chief Justice John Marshall, a finding which the American
public failed to support. See The Trial of Aaron Burr On An Indictment For
Treason before the Circuit Court of the United States, Richmond, Virginia, May
Term, 1807, Westcott and Co., Washington City, 1807.

Justice John Marshall was a Freemason, as was General Wilkinson. The
latter was buried from the home of Joel Poinsett, the U.S. Consul in Mexico.
Poinsett, after whom the poinsettia flower is named, organized Royal Arch
Masonry in Mexico.

Moreover, correspondence in the Burr conspiracy was carried out in "the
Royal Arch cypher." See Henry Dana Ward (editor). The Anti-Masonic Review
and Magazine, Vanderpool and Cole, Printers, New York, 1828, vol. 1, No. 10, p.
297; New Age, July 1941, p. 445; and Heaton's Justices Of The Supreme Court.

56. Columbia Encyclopedia, entry on Freemasonry, p. 1007.

57. Paul Hazard, The European Mind, 1680-1715, Meridian Books, The
World Publishing Co., Cleveland, Ohio, pp. 254-255.

58. Ibid.

59. "Masonry in America," editorial, New Age, April, 1940, p. 202.

60. Bernard Fay, Revolution and Freemasonry--1680-1800, Little, Brown
and Co., Boston, 1935, pp. 238-239.

See also New Age, June, 1931, p. 326, where it is stated that members of
the St. Andrew's Lodge of Freemasons comprised "the Boston Tea Party."

61. Fay, p. 233.

286

62. Ibid., pp. 254-255.

63. Ibid., p. 256.

Fay, at one time, had been considered by Masons an "unbiased student of
the life and times" of Franklin. However, that favorable attitude toward Fay
changed when the Craft learned he had headed the Secret Societies Bureau of the
Vichy regime in France during World War II. In that position he had published the
names of Freemasons and maintained duplicates of Grand Orient documents.
See: Harry L. Baum, "Democracy and Freemasonry," New Age, March, 1935, p.
143; "Paris Editor Defends Craft ..." unsigned news item, ibid., December,
1941, p. 755, where it is noted that Fay charged Masons with responsibility for
the fall of the Third Republic; and Reynold E. Blight, "Why Hitler Hates and Fears
Masonry," ibid., October, 1942, pp. 539-41, in which Fay's work is mentioned
favorably.

Following World War 11, Masons severely condemned his work exposing
Freemasonry. The Catholic French historian was sentenced to prison for life at
hard labor on a charge of intelligence with the enemy. He later escaped to
Switzerland. See New Age issues: January, 1949, p. 99; March, 1956, p. 176;
September, 1966, p. 25; and April, 1976, pp. 13-19.

64. Report Of A Committee To The New York Senate, Together With Extracts
From Other Authentic Documents Illustrating The Character And Principles Of
Free Masonry, published by request, and under the direction of several citizens of
New Haven, Connecticut, printed by Hezekiah Howe, 1829, pp. 13-14.

65. Ibid., p. 15.

66. Ibid., p. 11.

67. Ibid., pp. 7-8.

68. Ibid., p. 11.

69. Ibid., p. 4.

70. Investigation Into Freemasonry by a Joint Committee of the Legislature
of Massachusetts House of Representatives, March, 1834, pp. 9-10.

71. Ibid., pp. 14-21.

72. Ibid., p. 11.

73. Testimony Taken by the Committee of the Pennsylvania House of
Representatives To Investigate the Evils of Freemasonry, Read in the House of
Representatives June 13, 1836, Theodore Finn, Harrisburg, 1836, p. 15.

74. Ibid., pp. 39-42, 46.

75. Dee A. Strickland, "Masonry In Louisiana," New Age, August, 1962, p.
19.

76. Joseph Schlarman, Mexico, A Land Of Volcanoes, Bruce Publishing Co.,
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 1950, pp. 224-261.

77. New Age, "Library Notes," May, 1941, p. 315.

78. Strickland, ibid., p. 21.

79. Henry Zelchenko, "The Renegade Mason," ibid., March, 1963, p. 46.

Notes: Chapter 2/ The Mind Of Masonry

287

1. The Catholic Encyclopedia, entry on "Freemasonry," by Fr. Hermann
Gruber, New York, Encyclopedia Press, 1913, p. 776.

2. Ibid., p. 781.

3. Ibid.

4. Ibid., p. 776.

5. Ibid., p. 777.

6. Ibid., p. 775.

7. Ibid., pp. 782-783.

8. Ibid., p. 783.

8-A. Quoted in Fortnightly Review, November 15, 1921, p. 412.

9. Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Rite of
Freemasonry, Charleston, S.C., published by the author, 1871. The purpose of
the book is written on its title page.

10. New Age, January, 1950, "Report of the Committee on Publications,"
pp. 27-28.

11. Ibid., December, 1935, "Comment" section, p. 709; ibid., August, 1961,

p. 9.

12. Ibid., June, 1948, "Grand Commander's Message," p. 347.

13. Pike, op. cit.. Introduction, pp. iii, iv.

14. Lobinger, op. cit., p. 341. See also New Age, May, 1928, pp. 270-271.

15. Lobinger, p. 342.

16. New Age, April, 1924, editorial comment, p. 197.

17. Ibid., May, 1970, John C. Montgomery, "An Invaluable Working Tool:
The Use of Albert Pike's Morals and Dogma," pp. 28-29.

18. Pike, op. cit., p. 1.

19. Ibid., p. 2.

20. Ibid., p. 4.

21. Ibid., pp. 5-6. See also Chapter 1, above, p. 30.

22. Ibid., pp. 9-14. Thus, the lodge rooms throughout the world display the
Blazing Star, and Masonic triangle. Inside the latter is the letter "G."

Masonry's dedication to the Ancient Mysteries further emphasizes the pagan
orientation of the Craft.

The novice Mason is informed by the second full page of his Entered
Apprentice handbook that many of Freemasonry's symbols and teachings "go
back to the very childhood of the race." He is reminded of "the ceremonies of
ancient Egypt," and of the mysteries of Eleusis, as well as the rite of Mithras and
the Ancient Mysteries. See Carl H. Claudy, Introduction to Freemasonry, 1,
Entered Apprentice, Washington, D.C., The Temple Publishers, 1931, pp. 8, 27,
31, 41.

Masonic literature is replete with references to Isis, Osiris, and their son
Horus, who also was the son of Re, the sun-god. In the initiation ceremonies of
Egyptian mysteries the candidate knelt blindfolded on his bare knees and, with a
sword pointed at his throat, he vowed fidelity to the secrets of the Order. The
identical ceremony is enacted in the Apprentice (First) Degree of Masonry.
Similarly, in the Egyptian mysteries and in Masonry, the ceremony includes a
ladder with seven steps, symbolic language, hieroglyphic writing, passwords,
secret handgrips, a cap shaped like a triangle (pyramid) and an apron. See
Charles W. Heckthorn, The Secret Societies Of All Ages And Countries, vol. 1, p.
51. For Masonic initiation rites, see William Whalen, Christianity and American

288

Freemasonry, Milwaukee, Bruce Publishing Co., 1958, pp. 24-47; Barruel, vol. 2,
pp. 288-89; ibid., vol. 3, p. 87; and Robison, p. 91. See also Appendix C.

23. See notes 7 and 19, above, regarding "the great revolution" and
commitment to the "universal social republic."

24. Pike, op. cit., pp. 14, 814.

25. Ibid., pp. 23, 161.

26. Ibid., pp. 260, 275.

27. Ibid., p. 275.

28. Ibid., p. 524.

29. Ibid., pp. 323, 816.

30. Ibid., p. 817.

31. Ibid.

32. Ibid.

33. Ibid., pp. 817-818.

34. Ibid., p.818.

Gnosticism is the doctrine of salvation by knowledge, that is, knowledge of
the mysteries of the Universe and of magic formulae indicative of that
knowledge. It echoes Eden and man's desire to be a god. See Genesis 2:17; 3:4-
7. This knowledge involves man's refusal to recognize his status as a created
being subject to his Creator.

Gnosticism was an early Church heresy, the most formidable opponent of
which was St. Irenaeus (A.D. 140-202). It was ultimately defeated in the second
century when the Church asserted episcopal authority and drew the bonds of
catholicity closer. Subsequently, its principles were incorporated into Manichaeism
and Albigensianism, which were propagated into the Fourteenth Century before
dying out.

35. Malcom Barber, The Trial of the Templars, Cambridge, England,
Cambridge University Press (Paperback), 1980, pp. 1, 45, 48, 63, 178-192.

36. Pike, p. 818.

37. Ibid., p. 820.

Historic judgments on the reasons for the dissolution of the Templars by the
Council of Vienne differ, but it is interesting to note that the Council also
condemned the Beghards, a Gnostic and Manichaean group that flourished in
Europe at the same time. The Beghards held that "perfect men" could not be
blamed for any act they performed. See the New Columbia Encyclopedia, New
York, McGraw Hill, 1975, p. 261; John F. Clark-son, et. al.. The Church Teaches,
Rockford, 111., TAN Books and Publishers, 1973, p. 349.

Abbe Barruel observed: "It would be one of the most extraordinary facts in
history to see two hundred Knights accusing themselves of the greatest
abominations. It would be a still greater atrocity to see so many Bishops,
Noblemen, magistrates. Sovereign of different nations, sitting in judgment on the
Templars and publishing to the world, as free and uncontrolled, declarations
which had only been extorted from them by the fear of torture. Such a conduct
would be still more horrible than that of the Templars themselves."

The Abbe added: "Even if the Templars were entirely innocent of the crimes
imputed to them, what could have been the virtue and courage of an order, which
could demean itself so much as to make such declarations against itself? How
can Freemasonry glory in such an ancestry who, if their crimes were not
monstrous, must themselves have been monsters of the basest cowardice." See

289

Barruel, op. cit., vol. 2, pp. 381-382.

The Abbe also noted that 30,000 to 40,000 Knights survived condemnation
of the Order--and Philip the Fair and Pope Clement V. They lived in different
parts of the world, where they had nothing to fear from their persecutors, who
had died. Yet, not a single one had made a retraction, "not one leaves such a
declaration to be published after his death." Ibid., pp. 386-387.

38. Pike, ibid., p. 823.

39. Ibid., p. 23.

40. Ibid., p. 139.

41. Ibid., p. 140.

42. Ibid., p. 231.

43. Ibid., p. 248.

44. Ibid., p. 277.

45. Ibid., p. 294.

46. Ibid., pp. 539-540.

47. Ibid., pp. 304-305, 744.

The word Kabbalah is spelled in various ways, including Kabala and Cabala.
It means "to receive," and refers to the reception of traditional lore which goes
back to pre-Christian times. Unlike the Scriptures, it purportedly was entrusted
only to "the few elect ones." See The Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. 3, entry on
"Cabala," New York, Funk and Wagnalls, 1925, pp. 456-479; Encyclopedia
Judaica, entry on "Kabbalah," Jerusalem, Israel, Keter Publishing House,
Macmillan Co., N.Y., 1979, vol. 10, p. 653.

According to the apocryphal IV Esdras xiv: 5-6, Moses received instructions
from God on Mount Sinai to "hide" certain things that were made known to him
during that particular theophany. The secret knowledge reputedly comprised 70
written volumes. See: Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. 3, p. 356.

Even more instructive, the Encyclopedia says, is "The Book of Jubilees,"
which refers to the writings of Jared, Cainan and Noah. Abraham is presented as
the renewer, and Levi as the permanent guardian of those ancient writings. Ibid.,
p. 457.

The Cabala essentially is pagan in origin and has its roots in Chaldea and
Gnosticism, according to the Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. 3, p. 458.

48. Pike, p. 148.

49. Ibid., p. 161.

50. Ibid., p. 196.

51. Ibid., p. 213.

52. Ibid., p. 287. See also ibid., p. 308, where it is again asserted that the
Messiah has not necessarily arrived.

53. Ibid., p. 287.

54. Ibid., p. 155.

55. Ibid., p. 843.

56. Ibid., p. 819

57. New Age, January, 1950, "Report of the Committee on Publications," p.
27.

58. Francis St. Clair, The Katipunan, Or The Rise And Fall Of The Filipino
Commune, Manila, 1902.

59. New Age, March, 1923, G. Fernandez, "A Masonic Legend," p. 134.

60. Mildred J. Headings, "French Freemasonry Under The Third Republic,"

290

The Johns Hopkins CJniversity Studies In Historical And Political Science,
Baltimore, MD, Johns Hopkins Press, vol. LXVl, p. 34.

Miss Headings' work is based "for the most part on the official minutes of
the French Masonic councils and general assemblies; on Masonic periodicals;
and on histories and monographs written by Masons." Ibid., p. 8.

61. Ibid., p. 123.

62. New Age, June, 1932, "Allocution By The Grand Commander," p. 348.

63. The facts about Pike's statue are in James M. Goode's "The Outdoor
Sculpture of Washington, D.C." Washington, D.C., Smithsonian Institution Press,
1974, p. 228.

Pike was indicted for treason in the Circuit Court of the United States for the
Eastern District of Arkansas, and an undated brief by Pike, in response to the
indictment, is available in the Rare Book Room, Library of Congress,
Washington, D.C.

After the Civil War, Pike was involved in a lawsuit regarding property of a
person who had been involved in treason. See: Pike v. Wassell, 94 U.S. 711.
Briefs on the case were not available in the Law Library of the Library of
Congress.

Pike and a number of other Masons wrote to President Andrew Johnson
several times to appeal for Pike's pardon. The Presidential pardon was granted
April 23, 1866.

Microfilm copies of the correspondence are available at the National Archives,
Series M-1003: 10-33-9, reel 14, frames 02226-02266.

On the scalpings, see: The War of Rebellion, A Compilation of the Official
Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, War Department, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1902, Series 1, vol. 8, pp. 206-
207; 795-97. The series will hereafter be referred to as Rebellion Records.

64. Ibid., 206-207. Letter from Major General Samuel R. Curtis,
headquarters. Army of the Southwest, May 21, 1862 to Congressman B. F.
Wade, chairman of the Committee on Conduct of the Present War.

65. Ibid., p. 236.

66. Ibid., p. 207.

67. Ibid., p. 795-796.

68. The New York Times, March 12, 1862, p. 4.

69. New Age, October, 1927, Charles S. Lobinger, "The Master Builder," p.

475.

70. Rebellion Records, series IV, vol. 1, pp. 426-443, 513-527, 542-554,
669-687, 785.

On the Comanches astonishment, see: Frank Moore, editor. The Rebellion
Record, A Diary of American Events, New York, G. P. Putnam, vol. 3, 1862, p.
35.

71. New Age, January, 1980, Jesse W. Gem, "Albert Pike Memorial," p. 11.

72. Ibid., March, 1980, Grand Commander's Message: "Albert Pike-- The
Monumental Man," p. 2.

73. C. S. Lippencott and E. R. Johnston, Masonry Defined, Memphis, TN,
Masonic Supply Co., 1930, p. 233.

74. Ibid., p. 238. That also is the reason Negroes have their own separate rite
of Masonry, The Prince Hall Rite.

75. Albert Pike, Lectures On The Ary a, Louisville, Ky., The Standard Printing

291

Co., 1873, copyright 1930 by the Supreme Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 1, 2.

It is curious that Pike would so severely judge the Semitic race in view of
praising Masonry's indebtedness to the Jewish Kabbalah which, although it had
Chaldean origins, remained Semitic.

Further, Hiram, King of Tyre (a Phoenician city), is a key figure in Masonic
initiations. The Phoenicians gave the world the alphabet, without which we could
not read Pike at all.

76. Ibid., p. 11-12.

77. New Age, February, 1928, pp. 175-176.

78. Ibid., September, 1932, A Special Contributor, "Facts Relative To
Masonry In Mexico," p. 540.

79. Ibid., May, 1932, Grand Commander's Allocution, delivered at the 1931
Biennial Session of the Supreme Council, p. 288.

80. Ibid., March, 1947, editorial, "Negroes and Freemasonry," p. 146.

81. Ibid.

82. Ibid.

83. The Washington Post, November 26, 1976, p. B-15.

84. The New York Times, December 14, 1976, p. 39.

85. The Washington Star, August 5, 1979, p. A-8.

86. Ibid.

87. The Washington Post, May 7, 1983, p. A-1.

88. Ibid., January 8, 1986, p. A-7.

89. Ibid., April 10, 1983, p. B-1.

90. New Age, January, 1932, G. Kenderdine, "The Idea of God In Masonry,"
p. 269.

91. Pike, Morals and Dogma, p. 644.

92. Ibid.

93. Joseph Fort Newton, The Religion of Masonry, An Interpretation,
Richmond, VA, The McCoy Publishing and Supply Co., 1969, p. 3.

94. Ibid., pp. 48-49.

95. New Age, June, 1948, George H. Steinmetz, "Why Do You Go To The
Lodge?" p. 335.

96. Ibid., April, 1945, John H. Boyd, "Faith," pp. 159-160.

97. Headings, op. cit., p. 123.

98. Ibid., pp. 125-129.

99. Lobinger, op. cit., p. 776.

100. Ibid., p. 777.

101. Ibid.

102. Lobinger, pp. 777, 771-772. Also see: New England Craftsman, June,
1921, "Americanism and Americanization," pp. 239, 241; New Age, July, 1922,
"The Liberal Provision of the Towner-Sterling Bill," p. 411; ibid., August, 1923, p.
487; ibid., January, 1927, pp. 4, 28; ibid., July, 1932, Maurice F. Lyons, "The
Fourteenth Amendment To The Constitution, p. 410; ibid., April, 1934,
"Comment" section, where the New Age advocated the public school as the "only
agency" capable of fusing various peoples, tongues and customs; and where it is
noted that Masonry was the pioneer in advocating a federal Department of
Education, pp. 197-198.

Interestingly, the March 1924 issue of the New Age, p. 140, reported that in a
general essay competition among pupils of parochial and public schools in New

292

York, students of the former schools received 165 of 277 medals (60 percent)
which had been awarded in the competition.

103. Lobinger, p. 778.

104. Richard J. Gabel, Public Funds For Church And Private Schools,
doctoral dissertation, Washington, D.C., The Catholic University of America,
1937, pp. 266-267.

105. New Age, September, 1930, A Special Contributor, "A Divisive Factor in
Our National Life," p. 543.

106. ibid., December, 1934, "Comment" Section, p. 710.

107. ibid., December, 1935, editorial, pp. 711-712.

108. ibid., November, 1948, Henry Ware Allen, "Religion in The Public
Schools," p. 664.

109. Ibid., January, 1949, p. 10.

110. Ibid., September, 1958, editorial, p. 516.

In Genesis 2:17, God commanded Adam: "Of the tree of knowledge of good
and evil, thou shalt not eat. For in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou
shalt die the death."

In the following chapter of Genesis (3:4-5) we learn that the serpent tempted
Eve and said: "No, you shall not die the death. For God doth know that in what
day soever you shall eat thereof, your eyes shall be opened: and you shall be as
gods, knowing good and evil."

111. New Age, March, 1959, Dr. James D. Carter, "Why Stand Ye Here Idle?"
p. 155.

112. Ibid.

113. Ibid., January, 1959, William A. Brandenburg, "More Than Ritual," pp.
23, 26.

114. Ibid., February, 1968, Leonard A. Wenz, "Masonry And The Bible," p.
17.

115. Ibid.

116. Ibid., February, 1959, Frank C. Lorey, Jr., "The Evolution of American
Education," pp. 112-113.

117. Ibid., January, 1959, Grand Commander's Message: "Grass Roots
Activities," pp. 3-4.

118. Ibid., June, 1959, editorial, "Virginia School Libraries," p. 365.

119. Ibid., February, 1965, Luther A. Smith, Grand Commander,
"Encouraging Words," inside back cover page.

120. Ibid., December, 1965, "Current Interest" section, p. 34.

121. Ibid., June, 1966, "Current Interest" section, p. 34.

122. Ibid., May 8, 1968, p. 3.

123. New Age, August, 1925, p. 506; ibid., July, 1934, "Comment" section,
p. 392; ibid., February, 1956, editorial, "Scholarship Fund For Diplomatic
Training," p. 98; ibid.. May, 1956, editorial, "Financial Aid For Students," p. 280;
ibid., October, 1957, Dr. Cloyd H. Marvin, President of George Washington
Cniversity, and a 33rd Degree Mason, "The Scottish Rite Fellowships and Their
Significance," p. 587.

124. Ibid., May, 1966, "Current Interest" section, pp. 36-37.

125. See Albert C. Stevens, The Cyclopedia of Fraternities, 2nd. ed., New
York, E. E. Treat and Co., 1907, pp. xv ff; New Age, Nov., 1965, pp. 13, 16.

293

Notes: Chapter 3/ Warring On The Church--!

1. Anson Phelps Stokes, Church And State In The United States, 3 vols.,
New York, Harper and Bros., 1950, vol. 1, p. 833

2. Stokes, vol. 1, p. 834.

3. Albert C. Stevens, op. cit., p. xv.

4. Stevens, p. xix.

5. Ibid.

6. The Columbia Encyclopedia, entry: "Quebec Act," p. 2256.

The "Declaration" protested King George giving his assent "for abolishing the
free system of English laws in a neighboring Province, establishing therein an
arbitrary Government, and enlarging its boundaries, so as to render it at once an
example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these
colonies." See "The Declaration Of Independence and The Constitution Of The
United States Of America," 92nd Congress, House Document No. 92-328, 1972
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., p. 3.

7. W. Woodhouse, The Constitutions Of The United States According To The
Latest Amendments: To Which Are Annexed The Declaration of Independence
and the Federal Constitution, With Amendments Thereto, printed by E. Oswald,
Philadelphia, 1796.

8. Sister Marie Lenore Fell, The Foundations Of Nativism In American
Textbooks, 1783-1860, doctoral dissertation, Washington, D.C., The Catholic
University of America, 1941, pp. v, vi.

9. Fell, p. 224.

10. Ibid., pp. 11, 21, 33, 35, passim.

11. Ibid., p. 39.

12. Fell, p. 39, quoting from Whelpy, pp. 72-73.

13. Fell, pp. 102-103, citing Eliza Robbins, Tales From American History,
1829, p. 13.

14. Fell, pp. 149-150.

15. Michael Williams, The Shadow Of The Pope, New York, Whittlesey House
(McGraw-Hill Co.), 1932, p. 64.

16. Sister M. Evangeline Thomas, Nativism In The Old Northwest, doctoral
dissertation, Washington, D.C., The Catholic University of America, 1936, p. 45.

17. Ibid., p. 501.

18. Williams, p. 65.

19. Rev. Lyman Beecher, A Plea For The West, 2nd ed., Cincinnati, Truman
and Smith, 1835, p. 12.

20. Beecher, p. 182.

21. Quoted in Thomas, p. 53.

22. Ibid.

23. Cited in Thomas, p. 106, from the Presbyterian Of The West, November
8 and 15, 1838.

24. Carleton Beals, Brass Knuckle Crusade, New York, Hastings House,
1960, pp. 45-57.

25. Ibid., p. 63.

26. Ibid., p. 441.

294

27. See William O. Bourne, History of the Public School Society of the City
of New York, 1870, pp. 7, 31, 45.

See also: Arthur Jackson Hall, Religious Education In The Public Schools of
the State and City of New York, doctoral dissertation, Chicago, III., University of
Chicago Press, 1914, pp. 21, 39.

28. Bourne, p. 45.

29. Hall, pp. 50, 61-62.

30. Ray Allen Billington, The Protestant Crusade, New York, Macmillan and
Co., 1938, p. 144.

See also Stokes, vol. 1, p. 827, where almost identical views are expressed.

Neither man was Catholic. Stokes was Canon of the Washington Episcopal
Cathedral, Washington, D.C.

31. Billington, p. 147.

32. Billington, pp. 153-155.

33. Ibid., p. 157.

34. The Catholic Church has always revered, taught and propagated the
Sacred Scriptures. Virtually every Church liturgical ceremony, document, or other
pronouncement pertaining to the Faith is based on the Old and New Testaments.

The Council of Trent (1545-1563) reaffirmed the listing of the canonical
books of the Bible given by the Council of Florence (1438-1445)--a listing that
agrees exactly with the list given as early as the year 382 in the Council of Rome
under St. Damasus I. See: John F. Clarkson, S.J., et al.. The Church Teaches,
Documents of the Church in English Translation, Rockford, 111., TAN Books and
Publishers, Inc., 1973, p. 44.

Vatican Council II (1962-1965) reaffirmed this consistent teaching of the
Church in its document Dei Verbum, Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation.

Thus, the Catholic Church has adhered to and taught the Scriptures, both
Old and New Testament, centuries before Protestant Churches were founded, and
nearly 1500 years before America was discovered. Indeed, it was the Catholic
Church that determined which books of the Bible are inspired.

35. Billington, p. 156.

36. Ibid., pp. 165-166, 173.

37. Ibid., p. 183.

38. Billington, p. 229; Williams, p. 75. The New York Times, June 15, 1894,
p. 9.

39. Peter Condon, "Freedom of Religion and the Revival of Religious
Tolerance," History Records and Studies, Philadelphia, American Catholic
Historical Society, vol. 4, October, 1906, p. 214.

40. Stokes, vol. 1, p. 833.

41. Condon, p. 214.

42. Stokes, vol. 1, p. 835; Williams, p. 82.

43. Williams, pp. 84-85.

44. The New York Daily Times, July 8, 1854, p. 1.

45. Ibid., July 11, 1854, p. 1.

46. Ibid., July 15, 1854, p. 1.

47. Gabel, op. cit., p. 291.

Also, Robert H. Lord, John E. Sexton, and Edward T. Harrington, History Of
The Archdiocese of Boston, New York, Sheed and Ward, 1944, vol. 2, pp. 592-
593.

295

48. Williams, p. 89.

49. The New York Daily Times, November 7, 1854, p. 4; November 10, p. 1.

Barker was founder of the notorious anti-Catholic Know-Nothing

organization, the Order of the Star Spangled Banner. See: Who Was Who In
America, 1607-1896, revised ed., A.N. Marquis Co., New York, 1967, p. 108.

50. The New York Daily Times, editorial, November 9, 1854, p. 4.

51. Ibid.

52. Ibid., November 14, p. 1.

53. Ibid., June 9, 1855, p. 3.

54. Ibid., June 18, 1855, p. 1.

55. Charles S. Lobinger, op. cit., pp. 209-210.

Commenting on Pike's concern for the threat of the "foreign" vote, Lobinger
said: "Surely in its attitude on this great question, the Supreme Council of today
is following in the footsteps of its acknowledged leader."

56. Stokes, vol. 1, p. 823.

57. The New York Daily Times, June 14, 1856, p. 3.

58. Ibid., June 16, 1856, p. 3.

59. Charles H. Pullen, Miss Columbia's Public School, New York, Francis B.
Felt and Co., 1871, pp. 25, 39.

Similar books were: Stephen F. Blackwell's Garfield Or The Pope (1880);
Justin D. Fulton's Washington In The Lap Of Rome (1888); and also by the
latter author: Why Priests Should Wed; The Way Out, Or The Escape Of A Nun;
and his Woman In The Toils Of Rome.

60. Lord, et al., vol. 3, p. 65.

61. Ibid.

62. Stokes, vol. 2, p. 68.

63. Ibid.

64. See: Francis Newton Thorpe, The Federal And State Constitutions ... 7
vols., Washington, D.C., 1909, G.S. Government Printing Office.

The 1802 Constitution of Ohio is of particular interest, in view of the fact
that the Catholic Church was so bitterly opposed in that State.

Article VIII, Sec. 26 provided that "laws shall be passed by the legislature
which shall secure to each and every denomination of religious societies in each
surveyed township ... an equal participation, according to their number of
adherents, of the profits arising from the land granted by Congress for the
support of religions ..." Thorpe, vol. 5, p. 2912.

A similar provision was in the Constitution of 1851 (Article I, Sec. 7).

Also, Article VI, Sec. 2 of that same Constitution stipulated that "no religious
or other sect, or sects, shall ever have any exclusive right to, or control of, any
part of the school funds of this state." (Emphasis added). Thorpe, vol. 5, p.
2913.

Those provisions are of interest because they evidence (a) that after the
religion clause of the First Amendment was ratified, early Congresses provided
funds for the advancement of the Christian religion; and (b) that the general view
at the time was that no single sect or group of sects should have "exclusive" right
to or control over religious education funds.

65. The New York Times, January 14, 1884, p. 4.

66. Ibid., April 19, 1984, p. 1.

67. The Catholic Citizen, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, April 26, 1884, p. 1.

296

68. Encyclical Letter, Humanum Genus, by Pope Leo Xlll, April 20, 1884,
published in The Church Speaks To The Modem World, Etienne Gilson, editor.
Garden City, New York, image Books, 1954, October, 1961, edition, sections 1
and 2, p. 117.

69. ibid., secs. 4, 5, p. 118.

70. ibid., sec. 6, pp. 118-119.

71. ibid., secs. 6, 7, p. 119.

72. ibid., sec. 9, p. 121.

73. ibid., sec. 10, p. 122.

74. ibid., sec. 12, p. 123.

75. ibid., sec. 13, p. 123.

76. ibid., sec. 21, p. 128.

77. ibid., sec. 27, p. 131.

78. ibid., sec. 28, p. 131.

79. Donaid L. Kinzer, An Episode in Anti-Cathoiicism, Seattie, University of
Washington Press, 1964, pp. 35, 40-41.

80. ibid., p. 54.

81. ibid., p. 45, APA Principies, numbers 3 and 4.

82. See notes 75, 76, above.

83. Kinzer, p. 49.

84. Washington Giadden, "The Anti-Cathoiic Crusade," Century Magazine,
March, 1894, p. 792.

85. ibid., p. 791.

86. ibid.

87. ibid.

88. The New York Times, June 21, 1894, p. 9.

89. ibid.

90. ibid., June 22, 1894, p. 9.

91. Kinzer, p. 56.

92. The New York Times, June 9, 1894, p. 8. On June 11, 1894, the League
was viewed with favor by the Times, p. 5.

93. Kinzer, pp. 74, 75.

94. The Congressionai Record (House), June 14, 1894, pp. 6311, 6312.

95. Gabei, p. 525.

96. The Tribune commentary appeared on December 25 and 20, respectiveiy,
and can be found in the Congressionai Record, January 16, 1889, p. 871.

97. See Reuben Quick Bear v. Leupp, 210 G.S. 50 at 78. Kinzer, p. 78.

Gabei, p. 508, cites a circuiar pubiished by the CJ.S. Office of indian Affairs,

titied "indian Schoois and Education," which observed that indian education had
been under reiigious auspices from 1568 untii 1880.

Sen. Richard F. Pettigrew noted that the federai government had invited
reiigious organizations to buiid schoois for indian chiidren beginning in 1870.
Congressionai Record, Aprii 21, 1896, p. 4208.

98. Gabei, p. 526.

99. Kinzer, pp. 47-79.

See aiso: Congressionai Record (House), June 14, 1894, p. 6311, where the
League's petition appears, stating that its efforts to prohibit such appropriations
began with the first session of the 51st Congress (which convened March 4,
1889).

297

100. Kinzer, p. 92.

101. APA membership in various States is set forth in Kinzer, Table 1, p.

178.

Von Fossen's Masonic background is listed in ibid., p. 109.

102. The New York Times, June 7, 1894, p. 8.

103. Congressional Record, June 7, 1894, pp. 5928, 5932.

Rep. Linton's Masonic membership is cited in Kinzer, p. 60.

104. Congressional Record, June 8, 1894, pp. 5997, 6095.

105. Ibid., June 14, 1894, pp. 6310-6311.

106. James M. King, Facing The Twentieth Century, New York, American
CInion League Society, 1899, pp. 224-225.

107. Ibid., p. 580.

108. Ibid., p. 583.

109. Ibid., p. 588.

110. Congressional Record (House), February 4, 1896, pp. 1308-1309.

111. Ibid., p. 1309.

112. Ibid., pp. 1340-1341.

Subsequently, the entire bill was defeated by a vote of 134-144. Ibid., pp.
1341-1342.

113. Congressional Record (Senate), April 21, 1896, p. 21.

114. Ibid. (House), March 15, 1895, p. 2080.

115. Kinzer, pp. 202-203.

116. Ibid.

117. See, for example, the Act Making Appropriations for the Indian
Department, and for Fulfilling Treaty Stipulations, June 7, 1897, 30 Statutes-At-
Large 62.

See also, entry on "Sectarian" and "Sectarian Institutions" in the legal
reference. Words and Phrases, Permanent Edition, 1658 to Date, vol. 38-A, St.
Paul, Minn., The West Publishing Co., 1967, pp. 109-110, 111.

118. John Tracy Ellis, The Life of James Cardinal Gibbons (People's
Edition), edited by Francis L. Broderick, Milwaukee, The Bruce Publishing Co.,
1963, pp. 133-134.

119. Ibid.

120. Leo XIII, Letter to Cardinal Gibbons, Testem Benevolentiae, January 31,
1899, in The Catholic World, New York, April, 1899, pp. 133-134, 135.

The "Americanism" which had concerned Leo at the beginning of the 20th
Century blossomed into fullness in the States following Vatican Council II in the
1960s.

Notes: Chapter 4/ The Craft And The Klan

1. The New York Times, June 1, 1909, p. 9.

2. Ibid., October 13, 1911, p. 8; February 7, 1912, p. 6.

3. Ibid., April 8, 1916, p. 11; November 30, 1916, p. 6.

4. Ibid.

298

5. Ibid., March 1, 1920, p. 9; March 2, 1920, p. 10.

6. Ibid., January 20, 1919, p. 8; February 6, 1919, p. 24. See also Kahn's
reiteration of his views in his article, "Why Most American Jews Do Not Favor
Zionism," ibid., February 16, 1919, Sec. 7, The New York Times Magazine, p. 7.

7. The New York Times, February 13, 1919, p. 1.

8. Ibid., February 15, 1919, p. 16.

9. Ibid., September 25, 1919, p. 10.

10. Ibid., September 26, 1919, p. 12.

11. Ibid., November 20, 1920, p. 16.

12. See ibid., October 11, 1920, p. 16; October 13, p. 2; November 3, p. 11;
November 12, p. 5; December 1, p. 14; and December 14, p. 6.

13. The New York Times, editorial, "The Assailants of the Jews," December
1, 1920, p. 14.

14. Ibid.

15. Ibid., December 1, 1920, p. 19.

16. Ibid., February 25, 1921, p. 11, quoting from an article by Isaac
Landman in The American Hebrew, February 25, 1921.

17. The Times (London), May 8, 1920, p. 8.

18. Ibid., "Jewish World Plot. An Exposure. The Source Of The Protocols.
Truth At Last," August 16, 1921, p. 9.

19. Ibid., August 17, 1921, p. 9.

20. The World (New York), September 16, 1921, p. 2, quoting from The
Searchlight, July 30, 1921.

21. The World, September 6, 1921, p. 1.

22. Ibid., September 14, 1921, pp. 1, 2.

23. Ibid., p. 2.

24. Ibid.

25. Ibid., September 18, 1921, p. 2.

26. Ibid., September 15, 1921, p. 1.

27. Ibid., September 17, 1921, pp. 1-2.

28. CI.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on Rules, 67th
Congress, Hearings on the Ku Klux Klan, October 12, 1921, published as Mass
Violence In America, New York, The Amo Press and The New York Times, 1969,
pp. 37, 23.

The quotation concerning Evans' Masonic activity appears in The Fortnightly
Review, October 1, 1925, p. 401.

Israel Zangwell's statement is attributed to Rev. Ed. Albrecht of Milwaukee,
Wisconsin, and appears in Theodore C. Graebner's A Handbook Of
Organizations, St. Louis, Missouri, Concordia Publishing House, 1924, p. 192.

29. G.S. House Rules Hearings, pp. 19, 72.

30. Charles P. Sweeney, "The Great Bigotry Merger," The Nation, July 5,
1923, p. 10.

31. Ibid.

32. G.S. House Rules Hearings, p. 75.

33. David M. Chalmers, Hooded Americanism, The First Century of the Ku
Klux Klan, Garden City, New York, Doubleday and Co., 1965, p. 149 (on
Minneapolis); p. 191 (on Wisconsin); and p. 254 (on New York).

34. Lem A. Dever, Masks Off!--Confession of An Imperial Klansman, 2nd
revised ed., Portland, Oregon, published by author, 1925, pp. 39, 51.

299

35. New Age, January 4, 1924, p. 43.

36. Ibid., John Jay Chapman, "Strike At The Source," p. 214.

37. New Age, May, 1926, p. 306.

38. The New York Times, February 21, 1926, "The Klan's Invisible Empire
Fading," section 8, p. 1.

39. The five incidents cited are found in Sweeney, op. cit., pp. 8, 9.

40. House Rules Committee Hearings, p. 73.

41. See The New York Times, October 8, 1921, p. 4; and ibid., October 18,
1921, p. 6.

42. Ibid., May 16, 1922, p. 14; May 21, 1922, p. 14.

43. Lowell Mellett, "Klan And Church," Atlantic Monthly, November, 1923, p.
586.

44. Ibid., p. 588.

45. Ibid., pp. 589, 588.

46. Ibid., p. 588.

47. Ibid., p. 591.

48. Ibid.

49. Ibid., pp. 591-592.

50. "A Citizen From Oklahoma" (letter), Atlantic Monthly, November, 1923,
p. 720.

51. The Nation, untitled editorial, August 19, 1925, p. 199.

52. The Sunday Star (Washington, D.C.), August 9, 1925, p. 1.

53. Ibid., p. 2.

54. Ibid.

55. The Evening Star (Washington, D.C.), August 10, p. 6.

56. William R. Pattangall, "Is the Ku Klux Klan CIn-American," Forum, New
York, September, 1925, p. 321.

57. Ibid., p. 325.

58. Ibid., p. 327.

59. Hiram W. Evans, "The Klan: Defender Of Americanism," Forum, New
York, November, 1925, pp. 799, 811.

60. "The Klan's Invisible Empire Is Fading," no author cited. The New York
Times, February 21, 1926, Sec. 8, p. 1.

61. Ibid.

62. Ibid.

63. The New York Times, November 20, 1928. See also: New York, ex rel.,
Bryant v. Zimmerman, 278 Cl.S. 63 (1928).

Notes: Chapter 5/ Footsteps In The Sand

1. The New York Times, September 17, 1937, p. 12.

It is of interest to note that, in 1917, Tate had objected to Black serving as
Chief Prosecuting Attorney for the Circuit Court in Birmingham, Alabama. See
the Birmingham Age-Herald, January 23, 1917, p. 10. Subsequently, the
Alabama Supreme Court ruled that both Black and Tate were co-Prosecuting

300

Attorneys. Ibid., February 16, 1917, p. 10.

2. Birmingham Age-Herald, Dec. 12, 1916, p. 10. The date Black embarked
upon his legal career in Birmingham may be found in the Micropedia, Chicago,
Ency. Brit., Inc., 1981, vol. 2, p. 251, entry on Black.

3. Charles P. Sweeney, "Bigotry In The South," The Nation, November 24,

1920, p. 585.

4. Ibid.

5. Ibid.

6. Birmingham Age-Herald, August 11, 1921, p. 1.

7. Ibid., August 12, 1921, p. 1.

8. Ibid.

9. Ibid.

10. Ibid.

11. Ibid., August 13, 1921, p. 5; August 14, p. 5.

12. Ibid., August 14, p. 5.

13. Ibid.

14. Ibid., p. 1.

15. Age-Herald, August 17, 1921, p. 5.

16. The Papers of Justice Hugo L. Black, Box 511, "Miscellany," Legal
Papers, Alabama v. Stephenson Transcript of Trial, Official Report, August 23,

1921, p. 8.

17. Ibid., pp. 30-31.

18. Ibid., pp. 136-137.

19. Ibid., pp. 37, 34-35, 49.

20. Ibid., pp. 49, 3.

21. Ibid., pp. 145-146. Also see Birmingham Age-Herald, August 25, 1921,

p. 1.

22. Age-Herald, August 28, 1921, p. 4.

23. Ibid., October 18, 1921, p. 1.

24. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, September 29, 1937, p. 1.

25. Ibid.

26. Ibid.

27. Age-Herald, October 22, 1921, p. 2.

28. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, September 29, 1937, p. 1.

29. Birmingham Age-Herald, October 22, 1921, p. 6.

30. Ibid., p. 5.

31. Virginia Van Der Veer Hamilton, Hugo Black, The Alabama Years, Baton
Rouge, Louisiana, Louisiana State Press, 1972, pp. 92-93.

32. Ibid., p. 93.

33. Ibid., pp. 112-113.

34. Black's Papers, Box 28, "General Correspondence," Letter by Black
addressed "To Whom It May Concern," recommending William E. Fort, Jr., who
was seeking a fellowship. The letter noted that Fort's father had resigned his
judgeship to become Black's law partner.

Ibid., letter from Fort, Sr. to Black, May 21, 1933.

35. The New York Times, September 22, 1937, p. 1.

The Times article also mentioned Black's law partnership with Fort, and the
fact that Fort was a special assistant to the Attorney General of the Gnited
States in 1937.

301

36. Pittsburgh Post Gazette, September 29, 1937, p. 1.

37. The New York Times, September 13, 1937, p. 3.

38. Ibid.

39. Ibid., August 9, 1926, pp. 2, 4.

40. Ibid., January 20, 1928, p. 1.

41. Black's Papers, Box 72, Senatorial File, Campaign Materials, Presidential
Campaign, 1928-Correspondence.

42. Ibid.

43. Ibid. Senator Swanson's letter is dated September 15, 1928.

44. The New York Times, October 7, 1928, Section 111, p. 2.

45. Virginia Van Der Veer Hamilton, p. 157.

46. The New York Times, September 14, 1937, p. 18.

47. Congressional Record, 70th Congress, 2nd Session, Senate Proceedings,
February 5, 1929, pp. 2848-2853.

48. The New York Times, December 28, 1929, p. 9.

49. Ibid., March 7, 1936, p. 1. The word "subterfuge" is in the Times article.

50. The words "vague" and "a dragnet" were attributed to unidentified
Senators by the Times.

51. Ibid., March 12, 1936, p. 6.

52. Ibid., March 12, 1936, p. 1.

53. Ibid., March 28, 1936, p. 1.

54. Ibid., April 7, 1936, pp. 1, 16-17.

55. Ibid., February 24, 1937, p. 2.

56. Ibid., September 27, 1937, p. 5, where the McReynolds statement is
noted. The reference to Roosevelt's "unusual secrecy" may be found in The
Evening Star (Washington, D.C.), August 12, 1937, p. 1.

57. The Evening Star, August 12, 1937, p. 1.

58. The New York Times, August 13, 1937, p. 4.

59. See The Evening Star, August 12, 1937, p. 1 on the views of Senators
Borah and Austin. The same periodical carried an editorial on August 14, 1937,
p. A-6, regarding the issue of Black's Constitutional ineligibility to sit on the high
bench.

Black's Constitutional infirmity to succeed to the high bench under similar
circumstances was not unprecedented. However, in earlier instances of such
conflict the Constitutional proscription was legally resolved.

For example, in 1889, the Attorney General at the time ruled that a Senator
appointed Minister to Mexico could not serve in that post because the
emoluments of the Minister had been increased after the Senator's term in
Congress began.

Also, President-elect William Howard Taft selected Senator Philander Knox of
Pennsylvania to be Secretary of State. But it was discovered that the emoluments
of the Secretary's position had been increased when Knox was a Senator. The
Senator was qualified when Congress reduced the emoluments to what they
previously had been. See Thomas J. Norton, The Constitution of the Gnited
States--lts Sources And Its Applications, New York, Committee for Constitutional
Government, Inc., 1971, pp. 32-33.

60. The fact that Cummings never investigated Black's background was
noted in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, September 13, 1937, p. 2.

It also is of interest that a man named Walter S. Brower was a special

302

assistant to Cummings. Brower's name appeared on a list of members of the Ku
Klux Klan, which included the name of Hugo L. Black. See The New York Times,
October 2, 1937.

See also note 35, supra, where It Is noted that the judge who presided at the
1921 Birmingham trial when Black successfully defended the murderer of Fr.
James E. Coyle, and who later became Black's law partner, was serving in the
Attorney General's office when the decision was made not to investigate Black's
background as a prelude to the Alabama Senator's nomination to the Supreme
Court.

61. The Evening Star, August 16, 1937, p. 1; ibid., August 7, 1937, p. 1.

62. Ibid., August 18, 1937, p. 1.

63. The Evening Star, August 20, 1937, p. 1.

64. The New York Times, September 13, 1937, p. 3.

65. Ibid.

66. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, article by Ray Sprigle, September 13, 1937, p.

1 .

67. Virginia Van Der Veer Hamilton, op. clt., pp. 136-137.

68. Post-Gazette, September 14, 1937, p. 1.

69. Ibid., September 16, 1937, p. 2; September 18, 1937, p. 2.

70. The New York Times, September 13, 1937, p. 3.

71. The Nation, October 2, 1937, editorial: "The Education of Hugo Black,"
p. 337.

See also ibid., October 9, 1937, Max Lemer's article, "Hugo Black--A
Personal History," for a similar encomium of the new Supreme Court Justice, pp.
367-369.

72. The New York Times, September 25, 1937, p. 16.

73. Ibid., October 1, 1937, p. 20. The identical editorial appeared In the
Times two days later. See ibid., October 3, Sec. IV, p. 8.

74. Ibid., October 2, 1937, p. 1.

75. Ibid.

76. Quoted in ibid., October 2, 1937, p. 7.

77. Ibid.

78. Ibid.

79. Ibid., October 3, 1937, p. 2.

80. Ibid.

Other editorials negative toward Black's broadcast appeared in the Chicago
Tribune, Boston Transcript, and the St. Louis Post Dispatch.

81. The New York Times, October 23, 1937, p. 16.

82. Hugo L. Black, Jr., My Father, A Remembrance, New York, Random
House, 1975, p. 13.

83. Ibid., p. 104

Paul Blanshard was a notorious anti-Catholic writer whose screeds were
particularly popular in the years immediately following World War II.

84. Ibid., p. 176.

85. Ibid., p. 182.

86. Ibid., p. 172.

87. Black's Papers, Box 63, "General Correspondence. Letter from Law
Professor Julius Paul of the State Gnlverslty of Fredonla, New York, dated
January 10, 1972, to John F. Davies, clerk of the G.S. Supreme Court. Professor

303

Paul noted in the press that 600 volumes of Justice Black's notes had been
destroyed, and he inquired whether it was a tradition of the Court to destroy
bench notes and other material that might contain comments of judicial
conferences.

There was no indication in Black's Papers that a reply was made to the
professor.

88. Hugo L. Black Jr., op. cit., p. 255; 250-251.

89. Black's Papers, Box 63.

No record was located which showed the papers had been destroyed, nor
was there any record which indicated which specific papers were to be burned.

90. In re Murchison, 346 CJ.S. 136, 138 (1954).

304

Notes: Chapter 6/ The Craft Fights Religion-
Clause History

1. See p. 121, supra.

2. Bradfield v. Roberts, 175 Cl.S. 291 (1899), at p. 269.

3. Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 Cl.S. 410 (1923).

4. Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 G.S. 510 (1925).

5. Cochran v. Louisiana Board of Education, 281 Cl.S. 370 (1930).

6. Church of the Holy Trinity v. G.S., 143 G.S. 457 (1892) at pp. 465-466.

7. Ibid., p. 466-467.

8. Francis N. Thorpe, The Federal and State Constitutions...Washington,
D.C., Cl.S. Government Printing Office, 1909, vol. 4, p. 2471.

9. Ibid., vol. 3, pp. 1889, 1908-1909.

10. Ibid., vol. 5, p. 2597; vol. 1, p. 568; vol. 3, pp. 1689-1690; and vol. 5, p.
2793.

11. Ibid., vol. 5, p. 3100.

12. Jonathan Elliott, The Debates In The Several State Conventions On The
Adoption Of The Federal Constitution, 5 vols., Philadelphia, J.B. Lippencott Co.,
1896, vol. 3, p. 659.

13. Ibid., vol. 1, p. 328.

14. Ibid., vol. 1, p. 326.

15. Ibid., vol. 1, p. 334; vol. 4, p. 244.

16. Ibid., vol. 2, p. 353.

17. The Debates And Proceedings In The Congress Of The United States,
Washington, D.C., Gales and Seton, Publishers, vol. 1, pp. 433-434. Hereafter
this work will be cited as Annals of Congress, or Annals.

18. Annals, p. 729.

19. Ibid., pp. 729-730.

20. Annals, p. 730.

21. Ibid., p. 730-731.

22. Ibid., p. 756.

23. Ibid., p. 766.

24. Chester J. Antieu, Arthur T. Downey and Edward C. Roberts, Freedom
From Federal Establishment, Milwaukee, The Bruce Publishing Co., 1964, p.
130.

25. Ibid., pp. 130-131.

26. The Declaration Of Independence And The Constitution Of The United
States Of America, 92nd Congress, 2nd Session, House Document No. 92-328,
Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972, p. 22.

27. Charles C. Tansill, editor. Documents Illustrative Of The Formation Of
The Union Of The American States, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing
Office, House Document No. 398, 1965, p. 52.

28. Rep. William McCullough, Congressional Record, House, April 1, 1968,
p. 2372.

29. Annals, House, May 12, 1796, p. 1349.

30. Ibid., May 17, 1796, p. 1385. See also Senate Proceedings in Ibid, p.

113 .

305

31. Ibid., April 7, 1798.

32. See Congressional Record, House, April 1, 1968, pp. H-2372-2373. Ibid.,
Senate, April 30, 1968, p. S-4676. Also see Public Law 90-304, 1968.

33. Gabel, op. cit., p. 302.

34. Reuben Quick Bear v. Leupp, 210 G.S. 50 (1908), at p. 78. The sentence
with the word "for" appearing three times is recorded as it appears in the citation.

35. Report of the Committee of the Senate, 32nd Congress, 2nd Session,
1852-1853; Senate Report No. 376, January 19, 1853, p. 1. The Report is cited
in Franklin, et. al., "Appellee Brief," McCollum case, pp. 63-64.

36. Gabel, p. 532.

37. G.S. Congress, Senate, 79th Congress, 1st Session, Hearings on Federal
Aid To Education, S. 181 and S. 717, testimony of Selma M. Borchard, Vice
President, American Federation of Teachers, A.F.L., April 25, 1945, pp. 735,
737.

38. Each year, on or near Washington's Birthday, the First President's
Farewell Address is read on the floor of Congress. See, for example,
Congressional Record, February 20, 1984, pp. S1353-1358.

39. See Inaugural Addresses Of The Presidents Of The United States,
Washington, D.C., U.S. G.P.O., 1961, pp. 11, 84, 116, and 126.

40. Memorandum to author as Legislative Assistant to the late Congressman
James J. Delaney, (D., NY), from the Congressional Research Service, February
14, 1968.

41. A Compilation Of The Messages And Papers Of The Presidents, 1789-
1897, Washington, D.C., U.S. G.P.O., 1896, vol. 1, p. 504.

42. Ibid. Note his reference to what often is called the "Golden Rule"
(Matthew 7:12), and to his use of "our holy religion."

43. Terret v. Taylor, 9 Cranch 43 (1815) at p. 49.

44. Joseph Story, Commentaries On The Constitution Of The United States,
Boston, Little, Brown and Co., vol. 2, 1865, section 1871, p. 722. The first
edition of the Commentaries was written in 1833 while Justice Story was a
member of the U.S. Supreme Court.

45. Ibid., Sections 1865, 1868, 1871, pp. 726-728.

46. Vidal v. Girard's Executors, 2 Howard, 127, at pp. 198, 200, 201.

47. Mormon Church v. United States, 136 U.S. 1 (1889), at p. 49.

48. United States v. Macintosh, 283 U.S. 605 (1931), at p. 625.

49. New Age, October, 1933, Harry E. Grant, "Law," p. 619.

50. Robert H. Jackson, The Struggle For Judicial Supremacy, New York,
Alfred A. Knopf, 1941, p. 178.

51. Ibid., p. 180.

52. Ibid., p. xiv.

53. Statements of Scottish Rite opposition to public transportation of
children to parochial schools (and other government aid to children attending
such institutions) appeared in the New Age, May, 1935, p. 255; November, 1935,
p. 647; March, 1939, p. 133; November, 1939, pp. 655-656; April, 1940, pp.
196, 200; June, 1941, p. 330; October, 1941, pp. 581-582; January, 1942, pp.
15-16; January, 1943, pp. 5, 14; February, 1943, pp. 69-70; April, 1945, p.
146; November, 1946, p. 647; and December, 1946, pp. 710-711.

54. New Age commentary opposing religion in school, including prayer and
Bible reading, appeared in April, 1940, pp. 225-226; November, 1942, pp. 655-

306

656; November, 1943, pp. 655-656; December, 1943, pp. 593-594; November,
1944, pp. 457, 459-460, 467-468; January, 1945, pp. 5-7; January, 1946, p.
27; May, 1946, p. 262; and January, 1948, p. 8.

Opposition to released time religious instruction of children in public schools
appeared in the same publication in February, 1941, p. 71; June, 1941, pp. 328,
331; July, 1941, p. 390; October, 1941, p. 584; February, 1942, pp. 70-71;
September, 1942, p. 526; October, 1942, p. 533; July, 1943, p. 332; December,
1943, pp. 593-594; May, 1944, pp. 198-199; October, 1944, pp. 390-391, 393-
394; November, 1944, pp. 456-457; January, 1945, pp. 10-11; October, 1945,
p. 389; January, 1946, pp. 256-267; August, 1946, p. 457; and December,
1946, p. 716.

55. See New Age, November, 1935, "Comment" section, p. 647. Ibid.,
editorial comment, "Worth Remembering," pp. 648-649.

56. Cl.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on Education,
Hearings, April 6, 1937, Washington, D.C., Cl.S. G.P.O., pp. 267-269.

57. Ibid.

58. New Age, April, 1940, editorial, "Strange Times Have Come," p. 200.

59. See p. 128, supra.

60. Journal of the Virginia Senate, 1789, pp. 61-64. See also The Dally
Advertiser, New York, NY, June 26, 1790.

The quotation and references are listed in "Appellees' Brief" by John L.
Franklin, et al., counsel for the Board of Education, and Mr. and Mrs. Basch, in
the case of McCollum v. Board of Education, p. 50, filed in the Cl.S. Supreme
Court, November 17, 1947.

61. In his Inaugural Address on March 4, 1881, President Garfield said:

"The Mormon Church not only offends the moral sense of mankind by

sanctioning polygamy, but prevents the administration of justice through
ordinary intrumentalities of law.

"In my Judgment it is the duty of Congress, while respecting to the uttermost
the conscientious convictions and religious scruples of every citizen, to prohibit
within its jurisdiction all criminal practices, especially of that class which destroy
the family relations and endanger social order. Nor can any ecclesiastical
organization be safely permitted to usurp In the smallest degree the functions and
powers of the National Government." See Inaugural Addresses, p. 146.

On March 4, 1885, President Grover Cleveland, in his Inaugural Address,
said: "The conscience of the people demands . . .that polygamy in the Territories
destructive of the family relation and offensive to the moral sense of the civilized
world, shall be repressed." Ibid., p. 152.

62. Reynolds v. Gnlted States, 98 G.S. 145 (1878), at pp. 163, 164.

63. Ibid., pp. 164, 165.

64. Davis v. Beason, 133 G.S. 333 (1890), at p. 341.

65. Ibid., pp. 342-343.

66. Watson v. Jones, 13 Wall. 679 (1871), at p. 729.

67. Ibid., p. 728.

68. See supra, pp. 133, 124-5, 132-3.

307

Notes: Chapter 7/ Defusing The Parochial Aid

Bomb

1. New Age, March, 1939, editorial, "New Education Bill," p. 133. See also
ibid., November, 1939, a Scottish Rite policy statement views aid to parochial
schools as "menacing," p. 656; and ibid., April, 1940, an editorial, "Aid For
Parochial Schools," against aid to church schools, p. 196.

2. Ibid., April, 1940, editorial, "Strange Times Have Come," p. 200.

3. See Cl.S. Statutes At Large, 78th Congress, 2nd Session, volume 58
(1944), Part 1, Sec. 301(4), "List of approved institutions," which authorized the
Administrator of Veterans' Affairs to recognize and approve educational
institutions not approved by the various States, p. 289.

4. See Cl.S. Congress, Senate, 78th Congress, 1st Session, Committee on
Education and Labor, Hearings on S.1295, S.1509, The Servicemen's Education
and Training Act of 1944, December 13-15, 1943. See also: Cl.S. Congress,
House, 78th Congress, 2nd Session, Committee on World War Veterans, Hearings
on H.R. 3917 and S. 1767, Jan. 11-13, 17-18; February 24; March 9-10, 27-31,
1944.

5. See Congressional Record, 78th Congress, 2nd Session, March 13-May
17, 1944, pp. 2490-2493; 3075-3087; 4320-4367; 4434-4461; 4502-4523;
4607-4628; 4635-4678.

6. Ibid., May 12, 1944, p. 4517.

7. Ibid., March 13, 1944, p. 3087.

8. Ibid., May 11, 1944, p. 4342.

9. Ibid., pp. 4434-4435.

10. Ibid., May 12, p. 4441.

11. Ibid., May 12, p. 4446.

12. Ibid., May 15, pp. 4504-4505.

13. Ibid., March 13, 1944, p. 2491; March 24, 1944, p. 3081.

14. Ibid., May 17, 1944, pp. 4677-4678.

15. The Catholic population of the Clnited States in relation to the general
population, as of December 31, 1944, may be found in The Official Catholic
Directory, 1945, P. J. Kenedy and Sons, Publishers, New York, "General
Summary," p. 2, which is an insert following p. 1277.

Also see: The National Catholic Almanac For 1953, published by St.
Anthony's Guild, Paterson, N.J., 1953, "Gnited States Catholic War Records,"
under section headed: "World War 11," p. 195.

16. See New Age, September, 1957, Dr. Cloyd H. Marvin, 33rd Degree,
President of George Washington University, "Education For Government Service,"
Part 11, pp. 525-533.

Also see ibid., July, 1956, an advertisement soliciting applications from
college graduates "with Masonic parentage or relationship" to apply for
scholarships at GWU.

17. Ibid., October, 1957, Dr. Cloyd H. Marvin, "The Scottish Rite Fellowships
And Their Significance," p. 587-588.

See also ibid., August, 1925, p. 506; and July, 1934, p. 392, relative to the
$1,000,000 endowment by the Scottish Rite for GWU.

308

18. Ibid., p. 588.

19. America, December 16, 1944, "Federal Aid Issues," p. 211.

20. Congressional Digest, February, 1946, "The Question of Federal Funds
For Public Schools," p. 41.

Sen. Hill's 32nd degree membership in Masonry is noted in the
Congressional Directory, 79th Congress, 1st Session, published by the G.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., August, 1945, p. 18.

Also see Denslow's Ten Thousand Famous Freemasons, op. cit., vol. 2, p.
230.

21. New York Times, January 28, 1945, Sec. 4, p. 9.

22. G.S. Congress, Senate, 79th Congress, 1st Session, Committee on
Education and Labor, Hearings, Part 1, on S. 181, Federal Aid To Education, pp.
1262-1263.

23. Ibid., p. 264.

24. Ibid., pp. 265, 266. See also supra, this book. Chapter 3, pp. 74-76.

25. Ibid., pp. 267-269. Also see supra, Chapter 6, pp. 135-6.

26. Ibid., p. 377.

27. Ibid., p. 381.

28. Congressional Digest, February, 1946, p. 64.

29. See supra. Chapter 5, p. 121.

30. Black Papers, Box 34, General Correspondence, Hill, Senator, and Mrs.
Lister.

31. Scottish Rite News Bulletin, No. 61, April 5, 1945, p. 7.

32. Sen. Hill letter, Black Papers, Box 34.

33. Sen. Hill's Papers are stored at the Gniversity of Alabama Library in the
Special Collections Office. Researchers are required to seek permission from Mrs.
Hubbard to review the files.

The author dispatched a letter to Mrs. Hubbard by Express Mail on January
27, 1987, requesting permission to review her father's files, specifying exactly
which letter was needed. There was no reply.

The Post Office Department advised that the letter was received at Mrs.
Hubbard's home on January 29.

During a follow-up telephone call on March 11, 1987 to Mrs. Hubbard's
residence, the woman who answered said Mrs. Hubbard was not home, but that
she would be informed of the author's effort to get in touch with her. There was
no further reply.

34. Black's Papers, Box 28, "General Correspondence, Fraternal
Organizations" communication.

35. Ibid.

36. Ibid.

37. Ibid., Black's letter to Andrews, dated April 5, 1945.

Justice Black told Andrews: "In my present position, 1 do not desire to
become involved in any controversy over pending legislation."

That statement is somewhat confusing because Black's inquiry to Andrews
focused on efforts to "defeat" aid to public schools. He did not inquire what the
Fraternity's position was broadly on the school issue, pro and con.

Moreover, Black had initiated a letter to Sen. Hill 25 days earlier, to express
his support for the Senator's Aid to Education bill, and to express his pique
because leaders of Scottish Rite Masonry of the Southern Jurisdiction were

309

ostensibly opposing the Senator's legislation to aid public schools.

Justice Black also said he needed a response from Andrews "before 1 make a
final decision as to my future course in relation to membership [in the
Birmingham Lodge?]." That comment emitted the savor of a veiled hint that if the
Craft was in fact working to "defeat" aid to public schools, it could be
embarrassed by the loss of membership of a Justice of the CInited States
Supreme Court.

38. Scottish Rite News Bulletin, No. 61, April 5, 1945, p. 1.

39. Senate Education and Labor Committee Hearings, Part 2, April 13,
1945, p. 440.

40. Ibid., p. 452.

For Senator Donnell's Masonic affiliations, see Denslow, op. cit.

41. Senate Hearings, Part 2, p. 452.

42. Ibid., pp. 490-491.

43. Ibid., pp. 494, 495, 496, 497.

44. Ibid., April 26, 1945, pp. 766-767.

Sen. Donnell dominated the examination of witnesses supporting federal
assistance to parochial schools. Such a high profile for a freshman Senator, who
had only been sworn into office a few weeks prior to commencement of the
Committee hearings, was unusual in a body that takes the matter of seniority
very seriously indeed.

45. Ibid., May 4, 1945, p. 916.

46. Ibid.

47. Ibid., p. 918.

48. Ibid., pp. 918-919.

49. Ibid., p. 920.

50. Ibid., pp. 920-921.

In Black's own "Remonstrance" against those outraged by his membership in
the Ku Klux Klan, the then neophyte Justice, in his 1937 nationwide radio
address, said the First Amendment safeguarded "complete liberty of religious
belief." Any program, he continued, "which tends to breed or revive religious
discord or antagonism can and may spread with such rapidity as to imperil"
freedom of religious belief.

Such a situation, he warned, would fan the flames of prejudice and project
"religious beliefs into a position of prime importance in political campaigns." It
would "reinject our social and business life with the passion of religious bigotry."
Moreover, he cautioned, it would "bring the political religionist back into
undeserved and perilous influence in the affairs of government." (See supra, p.
118).

51. Senate Hearings, Part 2, pp. 925-927.

52. Ibid., Letter to Sen. Murray from Dr. Walsh, dated June 4, 1945. Included
with the letter is Dr. Walsh's report, titled, "A Novel Theory Of Crime," pp. 927-
931. See particularly pp. 928, 930.

53. Ibid., pp. 930-931.

54. Congressional Digest, February, 1946, p. 41.

55. See: Biographical Directory Of The American Congress, 1774-1971,
Washington, D.C., tl.S. Government Printing Office, 1971, entries on the
Committee members: James E. Murray, p. 1457; David 1. Walsh, p. 1874; Elbert
D. Thomas, p. 1805; Claude Pepper, p. 1528; Allen J. Ellender, p. 906; Lister

310

Hill, p. 1118; Dennis Chavez, p. 729; James M. Tunnel, p. 1835; Joseph F.
Guffey, p. 1041; Olin D. Johnston, p. 1200; J. William Fulbright, p. 974; Robert
M. La Follette, Jr., p. 1255; Robert Taft, Jr., p. 1786; George D. Aiken, p. 497;
Joseph H. Ball, p. 5467; H. Alexander Smith, p. 1714; Wayne Morse, p. 1445;
and Forrest C. Donnell, p. 871.

56. America, July 28, 1945, editorial, "Church And Federal Aid," p. 335.

57. The editorials in the New Age in July, 1945 were titled, respectively:
"Foreseeable," p. 261; "Changing Of The United States Culture," p. 264; and
"Ideal Church," p. 265.

58. America, June 29, 1946, editorial, "Amend Federal Aid Bill," p. 274.

59. Everson v. Board of Education, 132 N.J.L. 98; 300 U.S. 1 (1947), p. 3;
New Age, November 1944, p. 456.

60. New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals, volume 1785 (1945),
Transcript of Record, Everson v. Board of Education, Brief of Prosecutor-
Respondent, pp. 59-61.

Rogers' statements are in the New Age, November, 1935, p. 647; April,
1940, p. 200; and U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on
Education, Hearings, April 6, 1937, pp. 267-269.

61. N.J. Court of Errors and Appeals, vol. 1785, transcript, pp. 7-8.

62. 133 N.J.L. 350.

63. See Philip B. Kurland and Gerhard Casper (eds.), Landmark Briefs And
Arguments Of The Supreme Court Of The United States, vol. 44, Everson v.
Board of Education, Arlington, Va., University Publications of America, p. 691.

Transcript of Record, Supreme Court of the United States, October Term,
1946, No. 52, Everson v. Board of Education, Washington, D.C., Archives of the
United States, pp. 128, 130.

64. Kurland and Casper, pp. 853, 855-858.

Notes: Chapter 8/ Everson: Masonic Justice

Built On Sand

1. Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1, at p. 7. For Justice Black's
personal views see supra, Chapter 5 pp. 121-122.

2. Everson, pp. 7-8.

3. Ibid., p. 10.

4. Ibid., p. 13.

5. Ibid., pp. 13, 14, 15.

6. Ibid., p. 12.

Note that the majority opinion equates "non-believers" in God and His Son
with believers. Madison's "Memorial" never mentions non-believers. Actually,
Madison's document says that the bill he was opposing in the "Memorial" was
worthy of defeat because it was "adverse to the diffusion of the light of
Christianity." Ibid., p. 70.

The specific opponents of the legislation mentioned in the "Memorial" were

311

Quakers and Menonists (p. 66), although Madison, who was a Deist, a precursor
of modern-day CInitarian-CIniversalists, obviously had his own sect in mind as
well.

7. Everson, p. 16.

8. Ibid., pp. 15-16.

See also supra, pp. 146-150, relative to Justice Black sending Sen. Hill the
five principles on education advocated by Scottish Rite Freemasonry.

9. Ibid., p. 19.

10. Ibid., pp. 22-23.

11. Ibid., p. 23.

12. Ibid., pp. 23-24.

13. "Memorial," sec. 8, in Everson at p. 68.

14. Everson, p. 25.

15. University of Chicago Law Review, vol. xx. No. 3, Spring, 1953, p. 248.

16. "Memorial," sec. 9, in Everson at p. 69.

17. Justice Rutledge said: "In the documents of the times, particularly
Madison . . .but also in the writings of Jefferson . . .is to be found irrefutable
confirmation of the [First] Amendment's sweeping content," Everson, p. 34.

Rutledge added: "... the Remonstrance is at once the most concise and the
most accurate statement of the views of the First Amendment's author
concerning what is 'an establishment of religion.' " Ibid., 37. Also see the text of
the "Memorial," ibid., pp. 63-72.

18. Ibid., pp. 45-47, 59.

19. Ibid., p. 59.

20. "Memorial," sec. 4, in Everson at p. 66.

21. Everson, pp. 41, 42-43. Annals, vol. 1, p. 730.

22. Everson, p. 43, footnote 34.

23. Annals, p. 731.

24. Ibid.

25. Everson, pp. 40-43, footnote 35.

26. Reuben Quick Bear v. Leupp, 210 Cl.S. 50, at pp. 81-82.

27. Ibid., p. 79.

28. Ibid., pp. 53-54.

29. Supra, p. 153 and note no. 50, Ch. 7.

30. Supra, pp. 117-118.

31. Supra, pp. 137-138, 140; "Memorial," section 1, in Everson at p. 64; and
supra, p. 309.

32. See Reynolds v. U.S., 98 CJ.S. 145 (1870) at p. 164; Beason, 133 G.S.
333 (1890) at p. 342; and U.S. v. Macintosh, 283 CJ.S. 605 (1931) at p. 633.

33. Supra, pp. 127-129; 133-34; and 132-33.

34. Madison's "Memorial," sec. 1, in Everson at p. 64.

35. Black's Papers, Box 285, Public Correspondence on Everson, Folder 1,
Letter from Prof. Dunne, dated September 25, 1947.

36. Ibid. It has been shown that Black was a reader of Scottish Rite
publications. The arguments supporting both the majority and minority opinions
in Everson largely paralleled arguments which had earlier appeared in the New
Age, the Scottish Rite News Bulletin, and in testimony by Elmer Rogers of the
Scottish Rite.

37. New York Times, May 8, 1947, p. 26.

312

38. Ibid., May 9, 1947, p. 18.

39. Black's Papers, Box 286, Public Correspondence on Everson, Folder I. Mr.
Crossland's letter is dated February 21, 1947.

40. New York Times, May 15, 1947, p. 20.

41. McCollum V. Board of Education, 333 CJ.S. 203, at p. 212.

Twenty-four articles opposing released time for religious education appeared

in the New Age between February, 1941 and January, 1948.

42. McCollum, p. 210.

Either full or abbreviated versions of that same paragraph appeared in the
following decisions: Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 CI.S. 488 (1961), at pp. 488-489;
Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 CI.S. 203 (1963), at p. 219; Board of
Education v. Allen, 392 CI.S. 236 (1967), at p. 239; Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403

CI. S. 602 (1971), at p. 640; Committee For Public Education v. Nyquist, 413

CJ. S. 756 (1973), at p. 767; Meek v. Pittenger, 421 U.S. 341 (1975), at p. 358;
and Grand Rapids v. Ball, No. 83-990 (1985), at p. 8.

43. New York Times, November 21, 1948, p. 63.

44. See particularly the Appellees' Brief in the McCollum case filed by
Attorneys John L. Franklin, et al., which provides a superb analysis of the true
meaning and intent of the religion-clause. It is a devastating indictment of the
Court's total disregard for the relevant history of that fundamental charter of
religious freedom in the context in which is was formulated by Congress, and as
it was understood by the American people during the ratification process.

Among other things, Mr. Franklin and his colleagues said: "Persons having
no religion have no constitutional right to prohibit exercise of religion by those
who have." p. 23.

The brief invited attention to the following statement set forth by a respected
source of jurisprudence: "... a Constitution derives its validity not from the act
of the convention in framing it, but from that of the people in ratifying it, so that
the intent of the latter is the real question in arriving at its proper construction.
(70 ALR 26)" Franklin Brief, p. 40.

And further: "The plain fact is that whatever Mr. Madison's personal political
or philosophical views were about the undesirability of conferring the benefits and
aid of government upon religion or religious education, he did not, as a legislator,
attempt to write into the amendment any prohibition against equal government
aid to all religions." p. 43.

The Franklin Brief did not persuade Brother Black and his colleagues. The
arguments set forth therein were brushed away with the curt remark: " . . .we are
unable to accept . . .these contentions." McCollum at p. 211.

That remark is particularly worrisome in view of the hand-written note on
Professor Dunne's letter in Justice Black's files which indicates the Alabama
Jurist had not read the Congressional debates that provide documentation on
how the religion-clause was crafted. See supra, p. 171.

The Court's imperious dismissal without comment of an awesomely detailed
account of the legislative history of the religion-clause is nothing less than
frightening.

To his great credit, Justice Stanley Reed (who also was a Mason) tacitly
acknowledged, in his McCollum dissent, the validity of many arguments made
by Attorney Franklin and his colleagues.

Reed himself catalogued a long history of government accommodation of

313

religion; and with reference to Jefferson's "wall," said: "A rule of law should not
be drawn from a figure of speech."

Four years later, in the Zorach case. Justice Douglas in an oblique reference
to a truncated version of the Court's earlier ruling in Girard, said: "We are a
religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being . . (843 G.S.

306, pp. 313-314).

Justice Byron White made favorable reference to that statement in his partial
dissent in Lemon (1971), and Justices Burger, Rehnquist and White became
increasingly uneasy with the Court's quarantine of religion in society, as their
dissents made clear in the 1973 Nyquist decision, the 1975 Meek case, and their
opinions in subsequent cases.

However, it was Judge W. Brevard Hand of the G.S. District Court at Mobile,
AL, who made a laser-like strike on the Everson thesis. He documented the
shaky foundation of the "wall of separation" interpretation of the religion-clause,
and faulted the Everson reasoning which had elevated non-religion to the
Established national philosophy.

Judge Hand's 66-page opinion in Jaffree v. Board of School Commissioners,
issued on January 14, 1983, stated, in part: "It should be clear that the
traditional interpretation of Madison and Jefferson is historically faulty if not
virtually unfounded ..."

He said a careful review of the religion clause makes it "abundantly clear"
that "the founding fathers of this country and the framers of what became the
First Amendment never intended the establishment clause to erect an absolute
wall of separation between the federal government and religion." Judge Hand
referred to Justice Black's citation of Jefferson's "wall" as a "revisionary literary
flourish."

The Alabama jurist acknowledged his indebtedness to Dr. James McClellan,
former professor of Constitutional Law at the Universities of Emory and
Alabama, and later chief counsel of the Senate Subcommittee on Separation of
Powers. See The Wanderer, February 10, 1983, Paul A. Fisher, "Court Decision
On Religion Gets Congressional Notice," p. 1. See also: James McClellan, "The
Making And The Unmaking Of The Establishment Clause," in A Blueprint for
Judicial Reform, edited by Patrick B. McGuigan and Randall R. Rader,
Washington, D.C., Free Congress Research and Education Foundation, Inc., pp.
295-325.

Judge Hand was overruled, in part, by the Supreme Court in Wallace v.
Jaffree, No. 83-812 (1985).

45. Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488 (1961).

46. Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962); and Abington School District v.
Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963).

47. Board of Public Works v. Horace Mann League, 385 U.S. 97 (1966).

48. Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971).

49. Committee for Public Education v. Nyquist, 413 U.S. 756 (1973).

50. Meek v. Pittenger, 421 U.S. 349 (1975).

51. Stone V. Graham, No. 80-321 (1980).

52. Grand Rapids v. Ball, No. 83-990 (1985); and Aguilar v. Felton, No. 84-
287 (1985).

53. Wallace v. Jaffree, No. 83-812 (1985).

54. Vidal v. Girard's Executors, 2 How. 127 (1844), concerned the will of

314

Steven Girard, a Mason and founder of Girard College in Philadelphia. He decreed
that, following his demise, no clergy could enter the precincts of the College to
teach.

The Court, contrary to the Impression given by Justice Frankfurter, said
discussion of the public policies of a State "scarcely come within the range of
judicial duty and functions, and . . .men may and will complexlonally differ;
above all, when that topic is connected with religious polity, in a country
composed of such a variety of religious sects as our country, it is impossible not
to feel that it would be attended with almost insuperable difficulties, and involve
differences of opinion almost endless In their variety. We disclaim any right to
enter upon such examinations, beyond what the state constitutions, and laws,
and decisions necessarily bring before us." Girard at pp. 197-198.

55. See Schempp at p. 307, and Allen at p. 249.

56. Harvard Law Review, vol. 82, p. 1680 (1969).

57. See Walz v. Tax Commissioners, 397 G.S. 664 (1970) at p. 695; Lemon,
at p. 623; Nyquist, at p. 790; and Meek, at pp. 371, 373-374.

58. Girard, at p. 198.

59. New Age, January, 1959, William A. Brandenburg, "More Than Ritual,"
p. 25. Ibid., March, 1959, "Freemasons and Politics," p. 156.

60. Ibid., August, 1966, Grand Commander's Message: "A Major Victory For
Separation Of Church And State," pp. 3-11, p. 7.

61. Horace Mann League v. Board of Public Works of Maryland, 242 MD.
645; 387 G.S. 97 (1966).

62. New Age, August, 1966, p. 8.

63. POAG was organized in Chicago, Illinois on November 20, 1947.
Included on its executive committee was Elmer Rogers, long-time top aide to the
Grand Commander of the Scottish Rite, and Charles Williams of the National
Education Association (NEA). The executive director of POAG was Glenn L.
Archer, former legislative director of the NEA. See Lawrence P. Creedon and
Welton D. Falcon, Gnited For Separation, Milwaukee, Bruce Publishing Co.,
1959, pp. 13-15. Archer also was a 33rd Degree Mason.

Reportedly, 50 to 75 percent of POAG's first year budget came from the
Scottish Rite Masons of the Southern Jurisdiction. See Luke E. Ebersole, Church
Lobbying In The Nation's Capital, New York, The Macmillan Co., 1951, p. 71.

POAG regularly has been mentioned favorably in the New Age since its
founding in the mid-1940s. Moreover, the Form 990-A on file with the G.S.
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) shows the Scottish Rite Foundation, 1735
Fifteenth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., donated $105,000 to POAG between
1959-1964. Further, the Grand Commander noted that the Scottish Rite gave
POAG $40,000 to purchase an office building. See New Age, July, 1965, "Grand
Commander's Visitations," pp. 55-56.

Those random statistics are replicated, more or less, in later reports made to
the IRS by the Supreme Council and by POAG (under that name and under its
changed name, Americans Gnited).

No effort was made to find the tax reports filed by other entities integral to
Scottish Rite Masonry, primarily because the names of those groups could not be
Identified.

As for the Horace Mann League, Luther Smith, Grand Commander of the
Scottish Rite, received a certificate of life membership from the League "for the

315

fine service and support he and the Scottish Rite gave to the organization." See
New Age, August, 1967, pp. 34-35.

64. Ibid., October, 1955, Henry C. Clausen, "Report of Conference of Grand
Masters In North America," p. 589.

Chief Justice Warren's support for public schools was again noted four years
later in another article by Clausen. See New Age, May, 1959, Henry C. Clausen,
"Ban Masonic Cornerstones?" pp. 280-281.

65. Ibid., September, 1968, p. 34. See Flast v. Cohen, 392 G.S. 83 (1967).

66. Ibid. Flast effectively permitted PEARL to bring the Nyquist case to Court
in 1973, a decision which culminated in the anti-parochial school Aguilar
decision in 1985.

67. New Age, September, 1968, p. 34.

Included among PEARL's members are: Americans Gnited (formerly POAG);
American Civil Liberties Gnion; National Education Association; American
Humanist Association; American Jewish Congress; Baptist Joint Committee on
Public Affairs; Board of Church and Society of the Gnited Methodist Church;
Central Conference of American Rabbis; National Council of Jewish Women;
National Women's Conference, American Ethical Gnion; Gnion of American
Hebrew Congregations; and Gnitarian-Gniversalist Association. See "Who's Who
in PEARL v. Mathews," Church & State, March, 1976, p. 6. Church and State is
a publication of Americans Gnited.

One or another of those groups (frequently several at the same time) have
been involved in virtually every religion-clause case which has come before the
Supreme Court from Everson onward.

68. Flast, p. 84.

Sen. Ervin, who often has been hailed as an outstanding Constitutional
lawyer, consistently opposed aid to church schools, and authenticated his views
on the subject by regularly citing judicial opinions in the Everson case.

He received the Scottish Rite's "Individual Rights Support" award in 1972 for
"his efforts to articulate the true meaning and significance of the G.S.
Constitution, especially First Amendment rights for the American people." See
New Age, July, 1972, Current Interest section, pp. 33-34.

On May 24, 1972, the Senator held a luncheon at the G.S. Senate in honor
of Sovereign Grand Commander Clausen; and on October 16, 1973, he delivered
an address at the Banquet given by the Grand Commander. His address centered
on Justice Black's majority opinion in Everson. See New Age, September, 1972,
Current Interest section, "Sen. Ervin Honors Grand Commander Clausen," p. 42;
ibid., January, 1974, Hon. Sam J. Ervin, Jr., "Church, State and Freemasonry,"
pp. 7-11.

69. New Age, January, 1974, "Report of the Committee on Education and
Americanism," p. 44.

70. Ibid.

71. Ibid., January, 1976, "Report of the Committee on Education and
Americanism," pp. 19-22.

72. Lemon, Brief by Gnited Americans For Public Schools, p. 6.

73. Lemon, at pp. 613, 614.

74. New Age, October, 1971, Grand Commander's Message: "A Tremendous
Triumph," pp. 2-3.

75. Horace Mann League v. Board of Public Works of Maryland, 242 MD.

316

645 at p. 679.

76. Ibid., p. 680.

77. Ibid.

78. Roemer v. Board of Public Works of Maryland, 426 CJ.S. 736 (1976) at p.

755.

79. Ibid., p. 756.

80. Ibid., p. 778.

81. McCollum, Appellees' Brief by John R. Franklin, et al., November 17,
1947, p. 24.

82. In Re: Murchison, 349 CI.S 133 at p. 136.

Notes: Chapter 9/ Warring On The Church--II

1. New Age, March, 1922, Alfred H. Henry, "The Kingdom of Heaven--
Contrasting Views," pp. 131-132.

2. See: Triumph magazine, June, 1974, Paul A. Fisher, "The 'Catholic Vote' .
. .A Sleeping Giant," p. 12.

3. New Age, May, 1945, Grand Commander's Message, p. 195.

4. Ibid., November, 1950, E.P. White, Knight Templar, "New World
Evangelism," p. 662.

5. Ibid., August, 1952, editorial, "Bill Would Open Floodgates For 300,000
More Refugees," p. 457.

6. Ibid., March, 1954, Grand Commander's Message, p. 130.

7. Ibid., January, 1956, Dr. Ellis H. Dana, Executive Vice President,
Wisconsin Council of Churches, the National Council of Churches, and a Trustee
of Protestants And Other Americans Gnited for Separation of Church and State
(POAG), "The National Council And Rome," pp. 20-22, pp. 21-22.

Dr. Dana noted that he helped organize POAG, p. 20.

8. Ibid., September, 1954, book review of Geddes MacGregor's The Vatican
Revolution, published by Beacon Press, Boston, pp. 559-560. The Beacon Press
is operated by the Gnitarian Church.

9. New Age, July, 1958, Leonard A. Wenz, "A Growing Mistrust," p. 429.

10. Ibid.

11. Ibid., January, 1926, W.B. Zimmerman, "Let There Be Light," p. 28.

12. Ibid., May, 1949, editorial, "State-Church Issue," pp. 198-199.

13. Ibid., July, 1951, editorial, "G.S. Attorney General Hits Supreme Court
Decision," pp. 390-391.

A similar theme was echoed in the same publication a year earlier by Glenn
H. Ruth in "Is Democracy Threatened," New Age, August, 1950, pp. 481-482.

See also: ibid.. May, June, July, 1951, Emilio Gouchan, "The Historic Truth
On The Objects And Action Of Masonry," a three-part series in which the Buenos
Aires Mason emphasized in his concluding segment that help "will come from lay
Roman Catholics and many priests." Ibid., p. 359.

14. Ibid., April, 1955, Harold Rafton, "The Roman Catholic Church and
Democracy," p. 217-218.

317

15. Ibid., p. 372.

16. Ibid.

17. Ibid., p. 373.

18. Ibid.

19. Ibid., pp. 373-374.

20. Ibid., March, 1959, Grand Commander's Message, "An Autocracy Within
Our Republic," pp. 135-136.

21. Ibid., November, 1961, Willard Givens and Belmont A. Farley, "Our
G.S.A.," p. 16.

22. Ibid., December, 1967, "Report Of The Supreme Council's Commission
On Education And Americanism," pp. 135-136.

23. Ibid., p. 136

24. Ibid., January, 1971, Grand Commander's Message, "An Arrogant
Assault On Church-State Security," p. 4.

25. For a brief overview on the similarities between the "new Catholicism"
and the Reformation, see The New Columbia Encyclopedia, op. cit., entries on
"Protestantism," and "Reformation," pp. 2229; 2291-2292.

For a more comprehensive treatment of this phenomenon, see Msgr. George
A. Kelly, The Battle For The American Church, Garden City, NY, Doubleday and
Co., 1979; also, Joseph A. Varacalli, Toward The Establishment of Liberal
Catholicism In America, Lanham, MD, University Press of America, 1983.

26. New Age, February, 1950, editorial, "When Pius IX Was Igno-minously
Expelled From Masonry," pp. 71-72.

27. Ibid., p. 72.

Other articles tying priests to membership in the Masonic Fraternity included
the following: ibid., October, 1931, Emerson Easterling, "The Strange Case of the
Abbe Tunnel," p. 535; ibid., June, 1935, "Comment" Section, article titled,
"Surprising," p. 326; ibid., July, 1939, Frederic B. Acosta, "A Great Mason Of
His Day," p. 418; and ibid.. May, 1959, Aemil Pouler, "Freemasonry In
Hungary," p. 286, coupled with The New York Times, November 3, 1932, p. 2, in
which the priest spoken of, Fr. Janos Hock, is tied to Communism.

28. The other Encyclicals by Pius IX against Freemasonry are: Quibus
Quantisque, April 20, 1849; Multiplices Inter, September 25, 1865; Apostolicae,
October 12, 1869; and Etsi Multa, November 21, 1873.

Even if one grants the Masonic claim that Pope Pius IX had been a Mason,
the fact that he vehemently condemned the Craft would evidence that
Freemasonry is a moral evil of which fact even some of its own members (or
former members) provide testimony.

29. Extension magazine, July, 1934, "The Question Box," Question No.
4023, p. 27.

30. America, April 30, 1938, "Comment" section, p. 74.

31. Extension, November, 1949, William J. Whalen, "Why The Church
Condemns Freemasonry," pp. 13, 51.

32. New Age, July, 1950, editorial, "Emphasizing An Old Attitude," p. 392.

33. Ibid.

34. Ibid.

35. Ibid.

36. America, July 7, 1951, editorial: "Masonry and 'Americanism,' " pp.
345-346.

318

37. Ibid.

38. Ibid.

39. The New York Times, August 17, 1932, p. 38; ibid., October 11, 1932,

p. 20.

40. Ibid., December 3, 1934, p. 11; ibid., January 12, 1935, pp. 3, 34; ibid.,
January 22, 1935, p. 5; and ibid., February 11, 1935, p. 8.

41. Ibid., December 18, 1935, p. 4.

42. Ibid., February 18, 1933, p. 4.

43. Ibid.

44. America, January 14, 1956, Father Robert A. Graham, S.J., "Apostle To
The Freemasons," p. 243.

45. New Age, November, 1957, "Grand Commander's Visitation," p. 685.

46. America, November 29, 1958, p. 273.

47. Ibid., p. 274.

48. Ibid., pp. 274-275.

49. Ibid., p. 275.

50. Ibid., April 22, 1961, "Comment" section, "Priest And Freemason," p.

168.

51. G.S. Catholic, March, 1968, Father John A. O'Brien, "Our Friends, The
Masons," pp. 25-26.

52. Ibid., p. 26.

53. Ibid., April, 1966, "The Church And The World" section, headlined: "The
Masons Invite A Bishop To Speak," p. 59.

54. Ibid., March, 1968, O'Brien, op. cit., p. 27.

55. New Age, June, 1966, Alphonse Cerza, "The Vatican Council And
Religious Liberty," p. 12.

56. G.S. Catholic, September, 1966, "Catholic Membership In The Masons,
Why Not?" p. 44.

57. America, March 11, 1967, "Milestones In Ecumenism," p. 335.

58. Ibid., April 15, 1967, "Letters" section, p. 544.

59. Approaches, February, 1977, pp. 12-13.

60. New Age, March, 1925, Frank C. Higgins, "Beneath The Ninth Arch," p.

220 .

61. Ibid., June, 1924, editor's response to a question regarding exoteric and
esoteric aspects of Masonry, p. 371.

62. See Catholic Encyclopedia, op. cit., p. 780.

63. New Age, November, 1922, John Van Niece Bandy, "The Great Light," p.

517.

64. The New York Times, March 29, 1976, p. 31.

65. Ibid.

66. N.C. News wire service dispatch No. 24, August 24, 1976, "Church
Suspension Of Archbishop Defended." The dispatch did not cite specific
quotations from Conciliar documents which would authenticate that the three-
word slogan of the French Revolution, which also is a slogan of International
Freemasonry, had been embraced by the Roman Catholic Church.

67. Catholic Standard, Archdiocese of Washington, June 1, 1978, p. 1.

68. Pittsburgh Catholic, Diocese of Pittsburgh, March 13, 1981, p. 6.

69. Religious New Service (RNS) dispatch, March 13, 1984.

70. The Old Canon 2335, which dictated excommunication for membership

319

in Masonry, is set forth in its Latin and English versions in Approaches,
February, 1977, pp. 24-25.

The New Canon 1374, concerning "an association which plots against the
Church," may be found in The Code Of Canon Law (English translation),
prepared by the Canon Law Society of Great Britain and Ireland, London, Collins
Liturgical Publications, 1983, p. 244. The book is distributed in the United States
by William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, Ml.

71. The Wanderer, St. Paul, MN, December 15, 1983, Paul A. Fisher,
"Vatican Reaffirms Church's Opposition To Freemasonry," pp. 1, 9. Cf. also
Origins a documentary service of the NCCB, Washington, D.C., December 15,
1983.

72. The English language version of the editorial appeared in The Wanderer,
March 28, 1985, p. 3. Cf. also English version in Origins, June 27, 1985, p. 83.

73. Ibid.

74. Catholic Standard, June 13, 1985, p. 8.

Notes: Chapter 10/ Warring On The State

1. Sarah Gertrude Millan, Cecil Rhodes, New York, Harper & Bros., 1933, pp.
36-37.

2. Ibid., p. 195. See also: New Age, September, 1972, Art Brown, "Cecil
Rhodes, A Mason Whose Influence For Good Still Lives Through His
Scholarships," p. 28.

3. The Washington Post, "Potomac" section, March 23, 1975, Rudy Maxa,
"The Professor Who Knew Too Much," p. 17.

The subject of the Post piece, the late Professor Carroll Quigley in his book.
Tragedy And Hope, demonstrated that an intimate link exists between
international bankers and the British and American organizations which flowed
from Rhodes' secret society. Such a link would naturally follow since Rhodes
wished to control the world by "gradually absorbing" all its wealth.

4. New Age, May, 1955, Dr. Berthold Altmann, "Freemasonry And Political
Parties In Germany," p. 278.

5. Pike, Morals and Dogma, op. cit., p. 109.

6. C.S. Lipencott and E.R. Johnston, Masonry Defined, "compiled from the
writings of Albert G. Mackey, 33rd Degree, and many other Eminent Authorities,"
Memphis, Tenn., Masonic Supply Co., 1930, pp. 233-240.

7. Ibid., p. 240.

8. See supra, p. 74.

9. Origins, NC Documentary Service, a publication of the National Catholic
News Service of the G.S. Catholic Conference of Bishops, Washington, D.C.,
June 27, 1985, p. 83.

The Osservatore Romano article appeared in Italian on February 23, 1985.
The English language version appeared March 11, 1985.

10. New Age, April, 1935, Walter F. Meier, 33rd Degree, "Mason To Mason,"

p. 210.

320

11. Ibid., May, 1955, Dr. Berthold Altmann, "Freemasonry And Political
Parties In Germany," p. 278.

12. New Age, March, 1977, Grand Commander's Message, "Freedom And
Freemasonry," p. 6.

13. Ibid., July, 1935, p. 438. Other articles affirming the Masonic origins of
the Great Seal appeared in ibid., July, 1948, p. 409; August, 1948, p. 498;
February, 1978, pp. 51-55; and September, 1976, pp. 44-49.

Although a pamphlet published by the G.S. Department of State in July,
1980, titled, "The Great Seal of the Gnlted States," makes no reference to any
Masonic symbolism in the Great Seal, the publication fails to reflect the complete
background of the Seal, as evidenced by former Vice President Henry A. Wallace,
also a Mason.

Wallace disclosed that when the new design for the G.S. dollar bill was
shown to President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1935, the latter "at first worried that
using the Eye of Providence (the Masonic emblem atop the 13-step pyramid on
the reverse of the Seal) would offend Catholics. After being assured by Post
Master General James A. Farley [a Catholic] that it would not, Roosevelt gave
the go-ahead." See: The Washington Post, November 9, 1982, p. D-7.

14. New Age, February, 1980, Grand Commander's Message, "The Masonic
Seal Of The California Supreme Court," pp. 2-5.

15. Quoted in Allen E. Roberts' A House Undivided, The Story of
Freemasonry And The Civil War, St. Louis, Missouri Lodge of Research, 1961,
pp. 33-35.

16. Ibid., p. 75.

17. The War Of The Rebellion, A Compilation Of The Official Records Of The
Union And Confederate Armies, As Corrected, U.S. War Department,
Washington, D.C., Government Printing Office, 1902, Series II, Volume VII, p.
932.

The Grand Commander of the Corps De Belgique, one of the secret societies
operating in the State of Missouri, was Charles L. Hunt, who served as the
Belgian Consul in the United States. Ibid., p. 236.

18. Ibid., p. 231. Letter from Colonel J.P. Sanderson, Provost Marshal
General, Department of the Missouri, to Major General W.S. Rosecrans,
Commander of the same Department, June 12, 1864.

Referring to the Order of American Knights (OAK), Sanderson said the Order
"is rigidly secret," and its objective and aim is "the overthrow of the Federal
Government, and the creation of a North West Confederacy," ibid.

19. Sanderson to Rosecrans, ibid., p. 234.

20. Ibid., p. 233.

Albert Pike said the initiate into the Blue Degrees (the first, second and third
degrees of Freemasonry) "is intentionally misled by false interpretations" of
Masonic symbolism. "It is not intended that he shall understand them; but it is
intended that he shall imagine he understands them. Their true explanation is
reserved for the Adepts, the Princes of Masonry." Morals and Dogma, pp. 818-
819.

21. Rebellion Records, Series II, Volume VII, Sanderson to Rosecrans, p. 233.

See also: Report by Colonel J. Holt, Judge Advocate General to Secretary of

War Edwin M. Stanton, October 8, 1864. Violation of the oath of obligation to
one of the secret subversive organizations can result in "a shameful death," in

321

which the body of the guilty person shall be "divided into four parts and cast out
of the four 'gates' of the temple." Ibid., p. 938.

22. The Peace Society, one of the secret organizations operating in the
South, required the initiate to swear to the following: "1 bind myself under no less
penalty than that of having my head cut open, my brains taken from thence and
strewn over the ground, my body cast to the beasts of the field or to the vultures
of the air should 1 be so vile as to reveal any of the secrets of this order."
Rebellion Records, Series IV, Volume 111, p. 395.

Compare the above with Masonic penalties set forth supra, pp. 35, 239-240.

23. Ibid., Series 11, Volume Vll, pp. 234, 238.

24. "Report On The Order Of American Knights," Sanderson Reports, 1864,
Second Report, August 20, 1864, Copy 2, Records of the Office of the Judge
Advocate General (Army), R.G., 153, Entry 33, Box No. 4, p. 22, Washington,
D.C., G.S. Archives.

25. Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma, p. 155.

26. Sanderson, Second Report, pp. 89-90. The company was to "oppose the
central government" by means of "insurrection" and a "grand revolutionary
movement."

27. Sanderson Reports, op. cit.. Third Report, September 3, 1864, pp. 116,

118.

28. Ibid., Second Report, pp. 43, 47.

29. Rebellion Records, Series 11, Volume Vll, Judge Advocate Holt report to
Secretary of War Stanton, pp. 931, 932.

30. New York Times, June 19, 1871, p. 1.

31. Rebellion Records, Series 11, Volume Vll, Holt report to Secretary Stanton,
pp. 943-944, 949-950.

32. Lobinger, op. cit., p. 224. See also: Adjutant General's Records, Series
M-1003: 10-33-9, Reel 14, frames 0226-0266, Washington, G.S. Archives.

33. Lobinger, p. 226.

34. Ibid.

35. New York Times, January 10, 1867, p. 1.

36. Ibid., March 4, 1864, p. 5; March 15, 1867, p. 4; November 26, 1867, p.

1 .

37. Lobinger, p. 226. Lobinger cites Pike's "Reminiscences" as the source for
Granger's remarks before the Judiciary Committee.

38. Lobinger, p. 273.

39. New York Times, June 23, 1867, p. 1; June 24, 1867, p. 8.

40. Ibid., June 25, 1867, p. 1.

41. Ibid., p. 8.

42. The New Columbia Encyclopedia, op. cit., article on the Republic of the
Philippines, p. 2131.

43. Ibid.

44. See John T. Farrell, "An Abandoned Approach to Philippine History:
John R.M. Taylor And The Philippine Insurgent Records," The Catholic Historical
Review, vol. 39, January, 1954, pp. 385-407.

See also: "History of the Philippine Insurrection Against the United States,
1899-1903, and Documents Relating to the War Department Project for
Publishing the History," National Archives Microfilm Publications Pamphlet
Describing M719, Washington, U.S. Archives and Records Service, 1973.

322

45. Ibid., pp. 9-10.

46. John R.M. Taylor, The Philippine Insurrection Against The United States:
A Compilation Of Documents With Notes And Introduction, Galley Proofs, U.S.
War Department, Washington, D.C., 1909, U.S. Archives, Microfilm M719, 10-
29-8, Roll No. 9, p. 27.

In the Introduction, Taylor says (p. 2): " . . .it may be considered that in this
introduction 1 have done more than justice to the work of Spanish missionaries in
the Philippines. 1 am not a Catholic, and have said only what my investigations
of the subject have led me to believe was the truth in the matter."

47. Taylor, p. 27.

48. Ibid., p. 67, Exhibit 7.

49. Ibid., p. 80, Exhibit 9.

50. Ibid.

51. Ibid.

52. Ibid., p. 82.

53. Ibid., p. 83.

54. Ibid., pp. 91, Exhibit 11-C.

55. Ibid., pp. 91-92.

56. Ibid., pp. 85-86.

57. Ibid., p. 98.

58. Ibid., pp. 27-28.

59. Philippine Insurgent Records, 1896-1901, Micro Copy No. 254, Roll 9,
frames 306-309, U.S. Archives.

60. Ibid., frames 322-323.

61. Ibid., frame 323. The letter from Tolentino is dated October 10, 1899,
and written on La Patria stationery.

62. Ibid.

63. New York Times, July 30, 1899, p. 3; August 5, 1899, p. 6; August 7, p.

6 .

64. Los Angeles Times, July 31, 1917, Part 11, p. 1.

65. Ten Thousand Freemasons, op. cit., volume 1, pp. 7-8.

66. New Age, April, 1955, Mauro Barad, "Emilio Aguinaldo, Mason," p. 232.

67. Ibid., p. 234.

68. Ibid., June, 1947, pp. 397-398.

69. Ibid., June, 1947, pp. 334, 398.

70. Ibid., May, 1955, editorial, "War Damage Claim Disallowed," p. 268.

71. Ibid., June, 1932, Allocution Of The Grand Commander, delivered at the
1931 Biennial Session of the Supreme Council, p. 348.

72. Ibid., September, 1952, editorial, "Abuse Of The Public Press," p. 519.

73. An Explanation of the Black Hand's Masonic link is set forth in James A.
Billington, Fire In The Minds Of Men, New York, Basic Books, 1980, pp. 110-111
and footnotes 159-161.

74. See: Mary Edith Durham, The Serajevo Crime, London, George Allyn
and Unwin, Ltd., 1925, p. 85.

75. Ibid., p. 86.

76. Billington, p. 92.

Billington also substantially confirms what the Abbe Barruel and Professor
Robison had disclosed in the late 18th Century about the Order of Illuminati.
(See pp. 26 ff., above.).

323

77. Billington, p. 91.

78. New Age, February, 1945, Frederick C. Loofbourow, citing a Russian
exile and Mason, Dr. M.J. Imchanitzky, an "active member of the Masonic Club
'Rossia' in New York City," p. 82.

79. Ibid.

80. Lobinger, p. 831.

81. New Age, September, 1931, p. 527.

82. Ibid., January, 1939, editorial, "More Help Needed For Spain," p. 15;
February, 1939, "Comment" section, pp. 69-70; March, 1939, "Comment"
section, pp. 138-139.

83. Ibid., February, 1939, editorial, "For And Against The Embargo," p. 79.

84. Ibid.

85. Ibid., May, 1951, pp. 283-284.

86. Ibid., November, 1964, Robert Maxwell Walker, "Masonry And The
Spanish Revolution," p. 41.

87. Ibid., pp. 43-44.

88. Ibid., October, 1925, p. 602. The information was attributed to Dr. H.E.
Stafford, Past Grand Master of the Philippines.

89. Ibid., November, 1968, Morris B. DePass, "The Hoon Bong or Red
Society Of China," p. 51.

90. Ibid., March, 1939, a Special Correspondent, "The Sian Agreement," p.

106.

91. Ibid., July, 1948. Service established the Lodge on March 27, 1943, p.

403.

92. M. Stanton Evans, The Liberal Establishment, New York, The Devin-
Adair Company, 1965, p. 226.

93. Ibid., pp. 228-229, 231.

Service also signed an ad sponsored by the National Association of Chinese
Americans which appeared in The Washington Post in April, 1977 opposing
continued G.S. support for Free China, or Taiwan.

The address of the headquarters of the National Association of Chinese
Americans was given as 3524 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. The
address is the same as that of the Yenching Palace, a Chinese restaurant owned
by Van S. Lung, president of the Sino-American Export Company.

According to the late Congressman Lawrence McDonald, the Sino-American
Export Company "imports propaganda films from Red China." See
Congressional Record, 95th Congress, Extension of Remarks, "Red Chinese
Propaganda," April 27, 1977, p. E-2538.

94. New Age, Comment by the Grand Commander, June, 1948, p. 323.

95. Ibid., January, 1950, editorial, "The Protestant Revival," p. 9.

96. Ibid., November, 1950, E.P. White, "New World Evangelism," p. 662.

97. Ibid., April, 1951, editorial, "Catholic Action And The Three Exhibits Of
Its Dangers," p. 198.

98. Ibid., March, 1954, editorial, "The Paralysis Of Hysteria," p. 180;
January, 1955, Wallace Ruff, "Always Pushing," pp. 43-44; and February, 1955,
Claud F. Young, "Our Problem," pp. 79-80.

99. Ibid., May, 1931, Frederick J. Juchoff, "World Politics," p. 221.

100. Ibid. Also see ibid., p. 264.

101. Ibid., Jan., 1939, p. 31.

324

102. Ibid., April, 1932, The commentary was in a letter from which the
author's name was withheld. It appeared in a section of the magazine titled,
"Important News From Other Countries," p. 209.

103. Ibid., May, 1933, "Comment" section, pp. 327-328.

104. The item about the lodges changing their names appeared in the Times
on April 10, 1933, p. 1. The related editorial appeared April 22, 1933, p. 12.

105. New York Times, April 24, 1933, p. 4.

106. Ibid.

107. New Age, April, 1934, Arduino Melaragno, "Mussolini the Infallible," p.

209.

108. Ibid., February, 1934, "Masonry Overseas," p. 14.

109. Ibid., April, 1939, news item: "England's New Grand Master," pp. 298-

299.

Identification of Masonry with the Royal Family of England goes back as far
as 1737 when two sons of King George 11 joined: Frederick, Prince of Wales,
joined in 1737; and Augustus, Duke of Cumberland, was initiated in 1743. See
ibid., June, 1928, which traces an unbroken line of English royalty as members
of the Masonic Fraternity from 1743 through George VI, father of the presently
reigning Queen Elizabeth.

In 1977, a book by Stephen Knight was published by George G. Harrap and
Co., Ltd., titled. Jack The Ripper, The Final Solution. The volume provided
interesting details linking the famous "Jack-the-Ripper" murders to Lord
Salisbury, then Prime Minister of England, and Sir William Gull, Physician
Ordinary to Queen Victoria.

The murders were precipitated, so the book reports, because Queen Victoria's
grandson. Prince Eddy, sired a child out of wedlock by a liason with a poor
commoner who was a model. The Prince and the model, Anne Elizabeth Cook,
were married in a Catholic ceremony, and the child, a girl, was baptized Catholic.

Salisbury was one of the country's most influential Freemasons, as was Gull
and the Assistant Commissioner of Metropolitan Police, Sir Robert Anderson. All
were involved in the plot; and it was the secret brotherhood, said Knight, which
carried out the murders in an effort to silence the witnesses to the marriage and
baptism. Meanwhile, the mother, Anne Elizabeth Cook, was placed in a mental
institution on orders of the Prime Minister.

The child of the union, Alice Margaret, was the mother of the man who told
the intriguing story to the author of the book, the late Stephen Knight.

110. New Age, August, 1940, editorial, "May Prove Disastrous," p. 455;
ibid., Joseph P. Marcombe, "But One Answer Possible," p. 464.

111. Ibid., September, 1940, editorial, "Masonry And The Dictators," pp.
520-521.

112. Ibid., March, 1949, Hamilton, op. cit., p. 151.

113. Schick letter, October 1, 1945, to Commander, G.S. Forces Europe,
paragraph 11. Modem Military Records, Headquarters, G.S. Forces European
Theatre, G-5 (Civil Affairs), File: 080, "Agencies--From 1945," Washington,
D.C., G.S. Archives.

Schick's letter is in German, but an English translation accompanies it. The
citations are from the English translation.

114. Ibid., paragraphs, V, VI.

115. Ibid., paragraph XI.

325

116. Ibid., paragraph XIII.

117. Ibid.

Weishaupt said: "The great strength of our Order lies in its concealment; let it
never appear in any place in its own name, but always covered by another name,
and another occupation. None is fitter than the three lower degrees of
Freemasonry . . .Next to this, the form of a learned or literary society is best
suited to our purpose . . .By establishing reading societies, and subscription
libraries, and taking these under our direction, and supplying them through our
labors we may turn the public mind which way we will." See Robison, op. cit., p.
148.

See also Pope Leo XIII's comments, supra, p. 74, which made the same
point.

118. Schick letter, paragraph XIV.

119. Ibid., paragraph XV.

120. Ibid., paragraph XVI.

121. Letter, dated December 10, 1945, to Schick from Headquarters, G.S.
Forces European Theatre (G-5), File: 080, reference as in note 113.

122. Cablegram, March 28, 1946, from (JSFET (Main), File: 1945-46,
AG080, Societies and Associations (German Social And Fraternal Groups,
American German Clubs), Office of Military Government For Germany, OMGGS
Headquarters, Modern Military Records, Washington, G.S. Archives.

123. Memorandum, 1 April 1946, Subject: Freemason Lodges in Germany,
same reference as in note 122.

124. Memo to AGWAR, from OMGGS, signed CLAY, 271835B June, 1946,
ibid.. Modern Military Records.

125. Ibid., Letter from Gen. Bull to Gen. Clay.

126. Ibid.

127. Ibid., Letter from Potter to OMG, Germany, October 8, 1947.

128. Headings, op. cit., pp. 52-53.

129. New Age, July, 1941, Charles H. Tingley, "Masonry And The
Impending New Era," p. 124.

130. Ibid., April, 1943, Karel Hundee, "The Turning Point Of History," pp.
211 - 212 .

131. New Age, November, 1976, Robert E. Sconce, "A Soldier's Faith In
Masonry," pp. 10-11.

132. Ibid., January, 1942, editorial, "Masonry In Far East," p. 8.

133. Ibid., February, 1942, "A Japanese Opinion Of Freemasonry,"
translation of an article titled, "Temple of Mystery On Road to Destruction,"
published in the Osaka Mainichi on October 4, 1941. The translation was made
by the American Vice Counsel of Kobe, Japan, Otis W. Rhodes, 32nd Degree, p.
92.

134. Ibid.

135. Ibid., October, 1942, "Japan Strikes At Freemasonry." The Author is
listed as "A Mason On The Gripsholm." pp. 603-604.

136. Ibid., Sconce, op. cit., p. 11.

137. Ibid., p. 12.

138. Ibid.

139. Ibid., p. 13.

140. Ibid., April, 1954, Benton Weaver Deckey, "Masonry in Japan," p. 215.

326

141. Ibid., September, 1958, article by Grand Commander titled "Far East
Itinerary," pp. 529-537.

Notes: Chapter 11/ How It's Done

1. The New York Times, July 6, 1977, "The Shriners Came To Town," p. 21.
In 1928, the G.S. Supreme Court said the order known as Nobles of the

Mystic Shrine was founded "by and their membership is restricted to masons . .
.who have become Knights Templar or have received the 32nd degree in a
Scottish Rite consistory." See Ancient Egyptian Order v. Michaux, 279 G.S. 737
(1928), at p. 739.

2. Robison, op. cit., p. 147.

3. New Age, October, 1945, John C. Parsons, "What Do Masons Do?" pp.
403-404.

4. Ibid., October, 1968, Grand Commander's Message: "How To Create A
Favorable Opinion Of Freemasonry In The World Of The Profane," pp. 2-3.

5. Ibid., p. 3.

6. Quoted by Lobinger, op. cit., p. 244.

7. Barruel, op. cit., vol. 4, p. 232.

8. Ibid., p. 233.

Common to Masonry and the Illuminati are:

* References to mankind as a "rough, split and polished ashlar." Robison, p.
122; Pike in Morals and Dogma, pp. 5-6.

* Atheism. The Illuminati were instructed that "the Grand Secret is no
Superintending Deity." Robison, p. 156. Pike said Nature is "self-originated, or
always was and had been the cause of its own existence." Morals and Dogma, p.
644. Another Mason said: "When we talk to God we are talking to ourselves, for
God and Man are one and the same through the ties of Love ..." See New Age,
April, 1945, John H. Boyd, "Faith," p. 159.

* "Examine, Read, Think," was a command of the Illuminati. Robison, p.
140. The New Age used a very similar admonition: "Read, Mark, Learn." See
ibid., July, 1924, p. 439; November, 1924, p. 690; April, 1926, p. 238; and
March, 1934, p. 149. In 1945, the words were altered to say: "Read, Think,
Study." See ibid., April, 1945, p. 133; July, 1945, p. 261; August, 1945, p. 327;
and October, 1945, p. 389. Also see ibid., July, 1948, p. 454.

* Gnosticism. The Scotch Knight of the Illuminati is "particularly
recommended to study the doctrines of the ancient Gnostics and Manichaeans.
See Barruel, vol. 3, p. 147. And Pike wrote: "The real mysteries of knowledge
handed down from generation to generation by superior minds were the teachings
of the Gnostics . . .and in them [we find] some of the ideas that form part of
Masonry." Morals and Dogma, p. 248.

9. New Age, February, 1947, George Steinmetz, "The Worthy And Well-
Qualified," p. 79.

327

10. Ibid., p. 80.

11. Ibid., July, 1950, editorial: "Why Men Become Freemasons," pp. 393-

394.

12. Ibid., p. 394.

13. Ibid., May, 1940, editorial: "Investigation of Candidates," pp. 262-263.

14. Ibid., April, 1969, Richard B. Rule, "Freemasonry In The Home," p. 28.

15. Ibid., October, 1965, Homer C. Bryant, Jr., "Who? What? Why?" pp. 53-
54.

16. Ibid., July, 1948, "Read, Think, Study," pp. 454-455.

17. Whalen, op. cit., pp. 28-29.

See also: Report of New York State Senate Committee, op. cit., p. 4; and
Theodore Graebner, Is Masonry A Religion, Concordia Publishing House, 1947,
St. Louis, MO, pp. 27-28. Both publications report the contents of the oath
substantially as does Whalen.

18. Letter of John Quincy Adams to William L. Stone, August 29, 1832,
Adams Letters, Providence, printed by E. and J.W. Cory, 1833, p. 8.

19. Carl H. Claudy, Introduction To Freemasonry, 1, Entered Apprentice,
Washington, D.C., The Temple Printers, 1946, pp. v, 8.

20. Ibid., pp. 30, 31, 38-39.

21. Ibid., p. 60.

22. Ibid., pp. 26-27.

23. Ibid., p. 28.

24. Ibid., pp. 50, 51.

25. Whalen, p. 36.

26. Ibid., p. 42. See also Chapter 1, p. 35.

27. Whalen, p. 59.

28. Whalen, pp. 61-64.

29. Ibid., p. 65.

30. Ibid., p. 65.

31. New Age, January, 1945, W.O. Bissonett, "The Philosophy Of Scottish
Rite Masonry," p. 27.

32. Ibid., May, 1940, Rabbi H. Qeffen, "The Antiquity Of Symbolism," p.

290.

33. Ibid., September, 1968, Joseph H. Schwartz, "Together, But Differently,"
p. 52.

34. Gruber in the Catholic Encyclopedia, op. cit., p. 779.

35. Ibid., p. 775.

36. Preuss, A Study In American Freemasonry, op. cit., pp. 38-39.

37. New Age, December, 1952, Archie M. Rankin, "Masonry Means
Opportunity," p. 743.

See also Ibid., February, 1954, editorial on the Philippines, p. 108;
November, 1957, William E. Hammond, "Mouth to Ear," pp. 677-679; and
Lobinger, p. 315.

38. Headings, op. cit., pp. 92-95.

39. Lobinger, p. 777.

40. New Age, October, 1924, Grand Commander's "Allocution" at the
Supreme Council's Session at Charleston, S.C., September 24, 1924, pp. 594-
595.

328

41. Ibid., January, 1926, editorial, "Friendly Press," p. 138.

42. Ibid., July, 1928, p. 394.

43. Ibid., July, 1938, p. 436.

44. Ibid., February, 1939, p. 115.

45. Ibid., August, 1946, p. 656.

46. Ibid., February, 1947, p. 123.

47. Ibid., December, 1965, p. 11.

48. Ibid., p. 10; and September, 1970, p. 37.

49. The Wall Street Journal, April 15, 1987, editorial, "Senate Mud Balls," p.
5.

50. Letter from author to Mr. George Melloan, Deputy Editor, The Wall Street
Journal, April 16, 1987.

51. The Washington Times, Blair Dorminey, "Iced because he's a Mason?"
[sic], p. 2, "Commentary" section.

52. Letter to the editor, The Washington Times, June 8, 1987.

53. Minneapolis Star, May 21, 1980, pp. 13A, 14A.

54. Ibid., p. 14A.

55. Ibid.

56. Ibid.

57. Ibid.

58. Headings, op. cit., p. 110.

59. Ibid., p. 111.

60. For early Masonic influence in public life in America through Nativist,
Know-Nothing, APA, and Ku Klux Klan movements, see supra, chs. 3-4.

For Masons in Congress in 1923, see Chalmers, Hooded Americanism, op.
cit., pp. 282-283.

61. America, December 29, 1929, p. 290.

62. New Age, May, 1941, p. 309; ibid., February, 1957, p. 68.

63. Congressional Directory, 95th Congress, Joint Committee on Printing,
Washington, D.C., G.S. Government Printing Office, 1977, pp. 4 through 196;
ibid., 98th Congress, 1983-1984, pp. 4 through 209.

64. Ibid., p. 140. Buffalo News, October 16, 1986.

See also: New Age, July, 1956, Dudley Bunn, "Freemasonry And Politics,"
where it is stated that it is ethical for a politician to publicize the fact he is a
Mason. However, it is not ethical to list "all his Masonic affiliations and honors,"
p. 421.

65. Empire State Mason, February, 1953, p. 19.

66. Ibid.

67. New Age, March, 1973, p. 15, Grand Commander's "Tribute."

68. The Masonic identifications of the various Cabinet members were listed
as brief "filler" items in various issues of the New Age. See, for example, the
issues dated January, 1942, pp. 20, 53; February, 1942, p. 119; July, 1945, p.
294; April, 1949, p. 178; June, 1959, p. 265; and May, 1961, p. 38.

69. Ibid., August, 1962, editorial, "An Anniversary," pp. 12-13.

See also Headings, op. cit., p. 79, where it is noted that it was sometimes of
advantage in France "to conceal the masonic connections of those in high
political office." The same point is made in ibid., p. 101.

70. New Age, August, 1962, p. 13.

The editorial followed immediately after another editorial expressing concern

329

about President John F. Kennedy's alleged effort to amass more power in the
Executive Branch. See ibid., "The Thrust Of Power," pp. 9-10.

71. Ibid., May, 1972, Stuart Parker, PGM Manitoba, Canada, "The Heart Of
The Fraternity," p. 24. Although Brother Parker did not name those organizations
which required Masonic initiation, one such group is the Philalethes Society, "an
international association of Freemasons who seek more light." See ibid.,
January, 1956, p. 18.

72. New Age, September, 1948, p. 535.

73. Ibid., July, 1950, Harry L. Baum, 33rd Degree, "Masonic Responsibility,"
pp. 419, 420.

74. Ibid., October, 1955, editorial: "Hearings On The Bill Of Rights," p. 602;
and ibid., November, 1955, editorial: "Hearings Cancelled," p. 645.

75. Ibid., September, 1960, Grand Commander's commentary, "Mission to
Italy," pp. 20, 21, 49-50. Although the Grand Commander's report was made in
1960, the incident referred to was resolved in 1959, but no specific date is shown
in the article, except that there was a deadline set for February 18, 1960.

76. Mr. Herter's high rank in Masonry is noted in ibid., June, 1959, p. 265.
His award from the Craft is noted in ibid., December, 1959, p. 719.

77. Ibid., September, 1976, "Grand Commanders Honored By Congress," pp.
33-34.

78. The Washington Times, "Alice In Potomac Land," April 5, 1983, p. 2;
ibid., December 13, 1983, p. 2.

79. New Age, July, 1924, under headline: "Read, Mark, Learn," p. 442.

80. Ibid., April, 1944, Clarence R. Martin, 33rd Degree, "Travelling Military
Lodges," p. 165.

81. Ibid., pp. 166-86.

82. Ibid., February, 1945, editorial, "California College in China," p. 86.

83. Ibid., August, 1968, p. 33. In 1965, General Nickerson had distributed
Scottish Rite publications on "Americanism" in all schools under his command.

Notes/ Afterword

1. Christopher Dawson, "Religion and the Life of Civilization," in Enquiries
into Religion and Culture, New York, Sheed and Ward, 1933, p. 15, quoted by
Jeremy White, "Christopher Dawson (1889-1970), Historian of Christendom and
Europe," The Dawson Newsletter, Fayetteville, Ark., Spring, 1987, p. 6.

2. See supra, pp. 11, 121.

3. The World (New York), September 17, 1921, pp. 1-2.

4. Article V-A Civil Rights Law, c.664, Laws 1923, 1110, Secs. 53, 56. Cited
in New York ex rel. Bryant v. Zimmerman, 278 CI.S. 63 (1928), p. 66.

5. Ibid., pp. 72, 73.

6. Ibid., p. 73.

7. Ibid., pp. 73, 75.

8. Ibid., Records and Briefs, volume 278, p. 65.

9. Pike, Morals and Dogma, pp. 138, 140, 144.

330

10. Hermann Rauschning, Hitler Speaks, London, Thornton, Butterworth,
Ltd., 1939, p. 57.

Notes: Appendix C/The Ancient Mysteries

1. S. Angus, The Mystery Religions, New York, Dover Publications, 1975, pp.
vii, 1.

The Dover edition is a re-publication of the second (1928) edition of Dr.
Angus' work, which originally was published by John Murray, London, 1925,
under the title The Mystery Religions And Christianity.

2. Jules Lebreton and Jacques Zeller, The History Of The Primitive Church,
New York, Macmillan Co. (2 vols.), translated by Ernest C. Messenger, vol. 1, pp.
355, 356.

3. See 1 Timothy 1:4-5; 1 Timothy 4:7-8; 1 Timothy 6:20-21; Titus 1:10-
11; Colossians 2:16 ff; 2 Peter 2:1-22 (in verse 22 he refers to a return to the
mysteries as "The dog is returned to his vomit"); Apocalypse 2:6; 2:15; and
2:20-25.

4. Charles W. Heckethom, The Secret Societies Of All Ages And Countries,
New Hyde Park, N.Y., University Books, 1965 (2 vols.), vol. 1, p. 7.

The work originally was published in 1875 and was re-written and
republished in 1897.

5. Ibid., p. 9.

6. Ibid., p. 12.

7. Ibid., p. 14.

8. Ibid., pp. 14-15.

9. W.O. E. Oesterley, The Evolution Of The Messianic Idea, London, Sir
Isaac Pitman and Sons, Ltd., 1908.

Oesterley said: "In these myths were elements which were infinitely more
significant than earlier ages could ever have conceived them to be; for they
contained the germs of eternal truths which could only be realized by men in
whom the faculty for apprehending spiritual truth was more fully developed." (P.
270.).

He added: "In these myths some of the central truths of Christianity were
potentially in existence at the time when men first began to be thinking beings."
Ibid., p. 272.

See also Frederick Nolan, The Expectations Formed By The Assyrians That
A Great Deliverer Would Appear About The Time Of Our Lord's Advent, London,
published by Bagster and T. and W. Boone, 1826.

In his Encyclical Letter, Divini Redemptoris (concerning atheistic
Communism), Pope Pius XI opened with these words: "The promise of a
Redeemer brightens the first page of the history of mankind, and the confident
hope aroused by this promise softened the keen regret for a paradise which had
been lost."

10. Heckethom, p. 15. For Masonic initiation rites see Whalen's Christianity
And American Freemasonry, pp. 27-47; Barruel, vol. 2, pp. 288-9; ibid., vol. 3,

331

p. 87.

11. New Aqe, June, 1934, G.A. Browne, "A Masonic Pilqrimaqe To The
East," p. 349.

12. Ibid., July, 1953, editorial, "Civilization and Masonry," quoting from a
lecture by Dr. B.G. Wade before the Sydney Lodge of Research, p. 417.

13. Ibid.

14. Franz Cumont, The Oriental Religion In Roman Paganism, New York,
Dover Publications, 1956, pp. 46, 48, 50.

The Dover edition is a republication of the first English translation of Mr.
Cumont's Les religions orientales dans le paganisme romain (no translator
listed), published by G. Routledge and Sons, London, 1911.

15. St. Augustine, The City of God, New York, The Modem Library (Random
House), 1950, translated by Marcus Dodd, Book 11, section 4, p. 43.

16. Ibid., pp. 226, 232.

17. Cumont, pp. 66, 71.

18. Ibid., pp. 90, 91.

19. Ibid., pp. 81-82.

20. Ibid., pp. 97-98.

21. Ibid., pp. 125, 126; 251-255.

22. Ibid., pp. 152, 155, 156.

23. Ibid., pp. 157-158.

24. Ibid., p. 191.

25. Angus, pp. 309-312.

332

Select Bibliography

Books

Angus, S., The Mystery Religions, New York, Dover Publications,
1975. (The Dover edition is a republication of the 2nd [1928]
edition. Originally published by John Murray, London, 1925, as
The Mystery Religions and Christianity.

Antieu, Chester J., Downey, Arthur T., and Roberts, Edward C .,
Freedom From Federal Establishment, Milwaukee, The Bruce
Publishing Co., 1964.

Augustine, St., The City of God, translated by Marcus Dodd, New
York, The Modern Library (Random House), New York, 1950.

Barber, Malcolm, The Trial of the Templars, Cambridge, England,
Cambridge Clniversity Press (Paperback), 1980.

Barruel, Augusten de. Memoirs Illustrating The History of Jacobinism,
4 vols., London, T. Burton, 1798.

Beals, Carleton, Brass Knuckle Crusade, New York, Hastings House,
1960.

Beaumarchais, Pierre Augustin de, Ouevres Completes de Voltaire,
92 vols., Paris, Societe Litteraire-Typographique, 1785-1789.

Beecher, Lyman, Rev., A Plea For The West, 2nd ed., Cincinnati,
Truman and Smith, 1835.

Billington, James A., Fire in The Minds Of Men, New York, Basic
Books, 1980.

Billington, Ray Allen, The Protestant Crusade, New York, Macmillan
and Co., 1938.

Black, Hugo L., Jr., My Father, A Remembrance, New York, Random
House, 1975.

Bourne, William O., History of the Public School Society of the City of
New York, N.Y., 1870.

Canon Law Society of Great Britain and Ireland, The Code of Canon
Law (English Translation), London, Collins Liturgical
Publications, 1983.

Chalmers, David M., Hooded Americanism, The First Century of the
Ku Klux Klan, Garden City, N.Y., Doubleday and Co., 1965.

Clarkson, John F., S.J., et al.. The Church Teaches, Documents of the
Church in English Translation, Rockford, ill., TAN Books and

333

Publishers, Inc., 1973.

Claudy, Carl H., Introduction to Freemasonry: I, Entered Apprentice,
Washington, D.C., The Temple Publishers, 1931.

Cornwell, Rupert, God's Banker, London, Counterpoint, Clnwin
Paperback, 1984.

Creedon, Lawrence P. and Falcon, Welton D., Clnited For Separation,
Milwaukee, Bruce Publishing Co., 1959.

Cumont, Franz, The Oriental Religions In Roman Paganism, New
York, Dover Publications, 1956.

Davies, A. Powell, American Destiny (A Faith For America), Boston,
The Beacon Press, 1942.

-, The Faith Of An Unrepentant Liberal, Boston, The Beacon Press,

1946.

-, The Mind And Faith Of A. Powell Davies, edited by Justice

William O. Douglas, Garden City, N.Y., Doubleday and Co., 1959.

-, The Temptation To Be Good, New York, Farrar, Straus and Young,

1952.

-, The Urge to Persecute, Boston, The Beacon Press, 1953.

Denslow, William R., Ten Thousand Famous Freemasons
(Introduction by Brother Harry S. Truman, Past Grand Master of
the Grand Lodge of Missouri), St. Louis, Transactions of the
Missouri Lodge of Research, 4 vols., 1961.

Dever, Lem A., Masks Off!--Confession Of An Imperial Klansman,
Portland, Oregon, Lem A. Dever publisher, 2nd Revised ed.,
1925.

Durham, Mary Edith, The Serajevo Crime, London, George Allyn and
Clnwin, Ltd., 1925.

Ebersole, Luke E., Church Lobbying In The Nation's Capital, New
York, The Macmillan Co., 1951.

Elliott, Jonathan, The Debates In The Several Conventions On The
Adoption Of The Federal Constitution, 5 vols., Philadelphia, J.B.
Lippencott Co., 1896.

Ellis, John Tracy, The Life of James Cardinal Gibbons (People's
Edition), Francis L. Broderick, editor, Milwaukee, The Bruce
Publishing Co., 1963.

Evans, M. Stanton, The Liberal Establishment, New York, the Devin-
Adair Co., 1965.

Fay, Bernard, Revolution and Freemasonry--1680-1800, Boston, Little
Brown and Co., 1935.

Fell, Marie Lenore, Sister, The Foundations Of Nativism In American
Textbooks, 1783-1860, Washington, D.C., The Catholic University
of America, 1941.

Gabel, Richard J., Rev., Public Funds For Church And Private

334

Schools, Washington, D.C., The Catholic CJniversity Press, 1937.

Leo Xlll, Pope, The Church Speaks, Etienne Gilson, editor. Garden
City, N.Y., Image Books, 1954.

Graebner, Theodore C., A Handbook of Organizations, St. Louis,
Concordia Publishing House, 1924.

-, Theodore C., Is Masonry A Religion, St. Louis, Concordia

Publishing House, 1947.

Hall, Arthur Jackson, Religious Education In the Public Schools of the
State and City of New York, Chicago, Clniversity of Chicago Press,
1914.

Hamilton, Virginia Van Der Veer, Hugo Black, The Alabama Years,
Baton Rouge, La., Louisiana State Press, 1972.

Hazard, Paul, The European Mind, 1680-1715, Cleveland, Meridian
Books, World Publishing Co., 1967.

Heaton, Ronald E., Justices Of The United States Supreme Court
Identified As Masons, Washington, Masonic Service Association,
1969.

Heckethorn, Charles W., The Secret Societies of All Ages and
Countries, 2 vols.. New Hyde Park, N.Y., University Books, 1975.

Jackson, Robert H., The Struggle For Judicial Supremacy, New York,
Alfred A. Knopf, 1941.

Holmes-Laski Letters, The Correspondence of Mr. Justice Holmes and
Harold J. Laski, 1916-1935, Mark De Wolfe Howe, ed.,
Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1953.

Howard, J. Woodford, Mr. Justice Murphy, Princeton, N.J., Princeton
University Press, 1968.

Kelly, George A., Msgr., The Battle For The American Church, Garden
City, New York, Doubleday and Co., 1979.

King, James M., Rev. Facing The Twentieth Century, New York,
American Union League Society, 1899.

Kinzer, Donald L., An Episode In Anti-Catholicism, Seattle, University
of Washington Press, 1964.

Knight, Stephen, Jack The Ripper, The Final Solution, London,
George G. Harrap and Co., 1977.

Kurland, Philip B. and Casper, Gerhard, editors. Landmark Briefs And
Arguments Of The Supreme Court of the United States, Arlington,
Va., University Publications of America, 1976.

Lash, Joseph P., From The Diaries Of Felix Frankfurter, New York,
W.W. Norton and Co., 1975.

Laski, Harold J., Reason and Civilization, London, Victor Gollancz,
Ltd., 1944.

-, Studies in Law and Politics, New Haven, Conn., Yale University

Press, 1932.

335

Lebreton, Jules and Zeller, Jacques, The History of the Primitive
Church, 2 vols., translated by Ernest C. Messenger, New York,
Macmillan Co., 1946-1947.

Lippencott, C.S. and Johnston, E.R., Masonry Defined, Memphis,
Tenn., Masonic Supply Co., 1930.

Lobinger, Charles S., The Supreme Council, Louisville, The Standard
Printing Co., 1931.

Lord, Robert H., Sexton, John E., and Herrington, Edward T., History
Of The Archdiocese of Boston, New York, Sheed and Ward, 1944.

McGuigan, Patrick B. and Rader, Randall R., editors, A Blueprint For
Judicial Reform, Washington, D.C., Free Congress Research and
Educational Foundation, 1981.

Millan, Sarah, Cecil Rhodes, New York, Harper and Bros., 1933.

Newton, Joseph Fort, The Religion of Masonry, An Interpretation,
Richmond, Va., The McCoy Publishing and Supply Co., 1969.

Norton, Thomas J., The Constitution of the Clnited States--lts Sources
And its Applications, New York, Committee for Constitutional
Government, Inc., 1971.

Oesterley, W.O.E., The Evolution of the Messianic idea, London, Sir
Isaac Pitman and Sons, Ltd., 1908.

Phillips, Harlan, Felix Frankfurther Reminisces, New York, Reynal and
Co., 1960.

Pike, Albert, Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Rite of
Freemasonry, Charleston, S.C., published by the author, 1871.

Pullen, Charles H., Miss Columbia's Public School, New York, Francis
B. Felt and Co., 1871.

Roberts, Allen E., A House Undivided, The Story of Freemasonry and
the Civil War, St. Louis, Missouri Lodge of Research, 1961.

Robison, John, Proofs Of A Conspiracy Against All The Religions And
Governments Of Europe Carried On in The Secret Meetings Of
Free Masons, Illuminati, And Reading Societies, 3rd ed.. New
York, George Foreman, 1798.

Schlarman, Joseph, Mexico, A Land Of Volcanoes, Milwaukee, Bruce
Publishing Co., 1950.

Stevens, Albert C., The Cyclopedia of Fraternities, New York, E.B.
Treat and Co., 1907.

Stokes, Anson Phelps, Church And State in The Clnited States, 3 vols..
New York, Harper and Bros., 1950.

Story, Joseph, Commentaries On The Constitution Of The United
States, Boston, Little Brown and Co., 1833.

Tansill, Charles C., editor. Documents Illustrative Of The Formation Of
The Union Of The American States, Washington, D.C., U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1965.

336

Thomas, M. Evangeline, Sister, Nativism in The Old Northwest,
Washington, D.C., The Catholic CJniversity of America, 1936.
Thorpe, Francis Newton, The Federal And State Constitutions . .
.,7 vols., Washington, D.C., CJ.S. Government Printing Office,
1909. Varacalli, Joseph A., Toward The Establishment of Liberal
Catholicism in America, Lanham, Md., Clniversity Press of
America, 1983.

Whalen, William J., Christianity and American Freemasonry,
Milwaukee, Bruce Publishing Co., 1958.

Williams, Michael, The Shadow of the Pope, New York, Whittlesey
House (McGraw-Hill), 1932.

Woodhouse, W., The Constitution Of The United States According To
The Latest Amendments, Philadephia, E. Oswald, 1796.

Periodicals

America, New York, N.Y.

Approaches, Ayrshire, Scotland. (No longer published.)

Anti-Masonic Review and Magazine, New York, N.Y. (No longer
published.)

Extension Magazine, Chicago, ill.

New Age Magazine, the official organ of the Supreme Council, 33rd
Degree, Scottish Rite Freemasonry of the Southern Jurisdiction,
Washington, D.C.

Scottish Rite News Bulletin, Washington, D.C.

Cl.S. Catholic, Chicago, ill.

Wanderer, The, St. Paul, Minn.

Newspapers

Birmingham Age-Herald, Birmingham, Ala.

Chicago Tribune, Chicago, ill.

Evening Star, Washington, D.C. (No longer published.)
National Catholic Register, Los Angeles, Ca.

New York Times, The, New York, N.Y.

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Pittsburgh, Pa.

Sun, The, Baltimore, Md.

Sunday Star, Washington, D.C. (No longer published.)

337

Times, The, London.

Washington Post, The, Washington, D.C.

World, The, New York, N.Y. (No longer published.)

Articles

Condon, Peter, "Freedom of Religion and the Revival of Religious
Tolerance," Philadelphia, History, Records and Studies, American
Catholic Historical Society, October, 1906.

Farrell, John T., "An Abandoned Approach to Philippine History: John
R.M. Taylor And The Philippine Insurgent Records," Catholic
Historical Review, January, 1954.

Gladden, Washington, "The Anti-Catholic Crusade," Century
Magazine, Boston, March, 1894.

Headings, Mildred J., "French Freemasonry Cinder The Third
Republic," The Johns Hopkins Clniversity Studies In Historical
And Political Science, Baltimore, Md., The Johns Hopkins Press,
vol. LXVI, 1947.

Mellett, Lowell, "Klan and Church," Atlantic Monthly, New York,
November, 1923.

Pattangall, William R., "Is The Ku Klux Klan Cln-American," Forum,
New York, September, 1925.

Sweeny, Charles P., "The Great Bigotry Merger," The Nation, New
York, July 5, 1923.

Government Publications

Biographical Directory Of The American Congress, 1774-1971,
Washington, D.C., Cl.S. Government Printing Office, 1971.

Congressional Directory, Washington, D.C., Cl.S. Government Printing
Office, 1945.

Congressional Record, Washington, D.C., Cl.S. Government Printing
Office, various years.

Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the Clnited States, Annals
of the Congress of the Clnited States, 1789-1824, 42 vols.,
Washington, D.C., Gales and Seton publishers, 1834-1856.

Inaugural Addresses of the Presidents of the Clnited States,
Washington, D.C., Cl.S. Government Printing Office, 1961.

338

Investigation Into Freemasonry by Joint Committee of the Legislature
of Massachusetts House of Representatives, Boston, Mass., 1834.

Report of a Committee To The New York Senate. . ., New Haven,
Conn., printed by Hezekiah Howe, 1829.

Testimony Taken by the Committee of the Pennsylvania House of
Representatives To Investigate the Evils of Freemasonry,
Theodore Finn, printer, Harrisburg, Pa., 1836.

Trial of Aaron Burr On An Indictment For Treason, Washington, D.C.,
Westcott and Co., 1807.

Cl.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on Rules,
Hearings on the Ku KIux Klan, New York, The Arno Press and The
New York Times under title Mass Violence In America, 1969.

Cl.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on Cln-
American Activities, The Communist Conspiracy, Part 1, Sec. A,
Washington, D.C., G.S. Government Printing Office, 1956.

Cl.S. Congress, House of Representatives, 78th Congress, Committee
on World War Veterans, Hearings on H.R. 3917 and S. 1767,
Servicemen's Readjustment Act.

Cl.S. Congress, Joint Committee on Printing, Congressional Directory,
Washington, D.C., Cl.S. Government Printing Office, various
years.

Cl.S. Congress, Senate, 78th Congress, 1st Session, Committee on
Education and Labor, Hearings on H.R. 1295, S. 1590, The
Servicemen's Education and Training Act of 1944, Washington,
D.C., Cl.S. Government Printing Office.

Cl.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Education, 79th Congress, 1st
Session, Hearings On Federal Aid To Education, S. 181 and S.
717, Washington, D.C., G.S. Government Printing Office, 1945.

War of Rebellion, The, A Compilation of the Official Records of the
Onion and Confederate Armies, War Department, Washington,
D.C., O.S. Government Printing Office, 1902.

Writings of George Washington From Original Manuscript Sources, 40
vols., John C. Fitzgerald, ed., Washington, D.C., O.S.Government
Printing Office, 1941.

Manuscript Sources

Manuscript Division, Library of Congress:

The Papers of Justice Hugo Black.

The Papers of Justice Harold O. Burton.

339

The Papers of Felix Frankfurter.

Archives of the United States:

Taylor, John R.M., The Philippine Insurrection Against the United
States (Galley Proofs), U.S. War Department, Washington,
D.C., 1909.

Encyclopedias

Catholic Encyclopedia, The, New York, Encyclopedia Press, 1913.
Jewish Encyclopedia, New York, Funk and Wagnalls, 1925.

New Columbia Encyclopedia, New York, Columbia University Press,
1975.

New Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, New Hyde Park, N.Y., 1970.

Supreme Court Decisions

Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203

Bd. of Ed. V. Allen, 392 U.S. 306

Bradfield v. Roberts, 175 U.S. 291

Church of Holy Trinity v. U.S., 143 U.S. 457

Cochran v. Louisiana Bd. of Ed., 281 U.S. 370

Committee for Public Ed. v. Nyquist, 413 U.S. 756

Davis V. Beason, 133 U.S. 333

Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421

Everson v. Bd. of Ed., 330 U.S. 1

Flast V. Cohen, 392 U.S. 83

Horace Mann League v. Bd. of Pub. Wks., 387 U.S. 97

in Re: Murchison, 349 U.S. 133

Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602

McCollum V. Bd. of Ed., 333 U.S. 203

Meek v. Pittinger, 421 U.S. 341

Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 410

Mormon Church v. U.S., 136 U.S. 1

Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510

Reuben Quick Bear v. Leupp, 210 U.S. 50

Reynolds v. U.S., 98 U.S. 145

Roe V. Wade, 410 U.S. 113

Roemer v. Bd. of Pub. Wks., 426 U.S. 736

340

Roth V. a.S., 354 a.S. 476

Terret v. Taylor, 9 Cranch 43

Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 CJ.S. 488

CJ.S. V. Macintosh, 283 CJ.S. 605

Vidal V. Girard's Executors, 2 How. 127

Walz V. Tax Commissioners, 397 CJ.S. 664

Watson V. Jones, 13 Wall. 679

341

About the Author

Paul A. Fisher graduated from the Clniversity of Notre Dame and
subsequently attended Georgetown Gniversity School of Foreign Service and
the American University in Washington, D.C. He served in the Army with the
Office of Strategic Services (OSS) during World War 11 in North Africa and
Italy, and later he was called into service by the Army to serve as a
Counterintelligence Officer in Korea during the conflict in that country. For
eight years he was legislative and press aide to Congressman James J.
Delaney (D., NY), and later, on separate occasions, was Washington
correspondent for Triumph Magazine, the National Catholic Register, Twin
Circle Magazine and The Wanderer, a national Catholic weekly newspaper.

342